Vaughan Johnson wrote:
> Vaughan Johnson wrote:
>> Martyn Shaw wrote:
>>>>> Do we still need step 3e in release.txt about pre-sp1 runtimes? I
>>>>> will have a job testing that, since I probably have VC9 on the the
>>>>> machines that I have available.
>>>>> I suspect we don't, since it refers to 1.3.8 release and I don't
>>>>> remember the problem with 1.3.9 (but I don't remember many other
>>>>> things either!).
>>>> I think we do. The latest patch is sp1 and that's what introduced
>>>> the problem. Check
>>>> C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio
>>>> 9.0\VC\redist\x86\Microsoft.VC90.CRT and see which runtimes it
>>>> refers to. I'm still building with the hacked (fixed) version.
>>> The manifest there refers to version="9.0.30729.1", which is the
>>> version of the 3 redistributables there also.
> I think there are only 2 for VC, right, msvcp90.dll and msvcr90.dll?
I have a msvcm90.dll there as well, but we aren't using it.
>> That's the sp1 set, so I'd be surprised if it works on machines
>> without VC9. I think I can find a machine that far behind, so please
>> post the link of your build again and I'll test it.
> I downloaded your rc2, Martyn, and it worked, but when I edited the
> Microsoft.VC90.CRT.manifest, it referred to 9.0.21022.8, which is the
> hacked version described in release.txt.
I followed the instructions for the rc2!
But you're right that the DLL's
> are marked with the 9.0.30729.1.
> I tried removing every copy of VC9 manifests, dlls, etc from my Win2k
> system and Audacity install dir, but something reinstalls them on
> startup and some Windows service uses them, so I can't delete them when
> Windows is running. I haven't found the suspect, and don't have the
> hours to do so. So I can't tell. Anybody have an ancient non-updated Win
> machine that doesn't have any *vc*90* manifests or DLL's?
> Alternatively, hacking the Microsoft.VC90.CRT.manifest in the Audacity
> install back to use 9.0.30729.1, Audacity runs fine. Not only that,
> hacking it to say "xxx" for the version works, too, and in both cases
> the Dependency Walker says it's getting the DLLs in the Audacity install
> directory, as we want. So I think the manifest gets cached somewhere
> (Registry?) or if the local manifest is broken, it just uses the dll's
> in the app dir. I remember when I figured out the fix, the docs said
> that, but wasn't always true. Anyway, I'd say do it as directed in
> "release.txt" until there's a new patch to VS2008 or we upgrade to VS2010.
> - V
> Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience,
> a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing.
> Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere.
> audacity-devel mailing list