is there a reason why you dont use ini-file for MoonAV-config?
core.cfg seems to follow ini-file-syntax, but without having a (or some) [Section] header(s).
This will prevent some sofware deployment, configuration and management systems to cope easyly with MoonAV configuration.
In addition attempts to map this cfg/ini file to registry may fail, if you don't use ini-file handling API (did you?)
And last but not least: If you don't put config in registry, config may not protectable and/or enforced through (group-)policies... =;-(
Any enlightment for me, why config is put in core.cfg rather than in registry?
Best regards
thomas
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
is there a reason why you dont use ini-file for MoonAV-config?
core.cfg seems to follow ini-file-syntax, but without having a (or some) [Section] header(s).
This will prevent some sofware deployment, configuration and management systems to cope easyly with MoonAV configuration.
In addition attempts to map this cfg/ini file to registry may fail, if you don't use ini-file handling API (did you?)
And last but not least: If you don't put config in registry, config may not protectable and/or enforced through (group-)policies... =;-(
Any enlightment for me, why config is put in core.cfg rather than in registry?
Best regards
thomas
Hi,
It is not using INI API, there is a mechanism that generate source code from cfg file :)
Oops, I am thinking what encoding algorithm is good if anyone can see how it works using
SF CVS system :)
let me know
regards,
DUC