From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:00:05 +0000 From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" Message-ID: <395445A5.E778FB1D@null.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200006221319.JAA25125@small-gods.mit.edu>, <200006222247.XAA17842@whitecrow.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: [9fans] SO for plan9? Topicbox-Message-UUID: ca32627a-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Steve Kilbane wrote: > Greg Hudson wrote: > > By coincidence, I've read this article. The primary problems > > discussed in the article stem from the fact that Windows applications > > often ship with replacement DLLs for system libraries. > ...in which case, they deserve what they get. Actually, they're not "replacement" in the sense you're thinking. They are the standard "redistributable" modules and are included in the installer to make sure that the end-user has them. Often the end user doesn't have an important library or has a very old version that doesn't support features the application depends on.