Compiling VB6 DLLs in Vista

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

Which newsgroup shud I use to ask questions about Vista and problems
compiling VB6 DLLs there?????

Archived from group: microsoft>public>vb>enterprise

Ralph · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4148

"Garry" wrote in message@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Which newsgroup shud I use to ask questions about Vista and problems
> compiling VB6 DLLs there?????
>

Here is probably as good a place as any (while theoretically ~.vb.com is the
more appropriate site). This group and ~.vb.general.discussion have perhaps
the most activity.

So what did M$ break this time?

-ralph

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

Well, I compile directly to c:\ProgramFiles\Common
Files\CompanyName\MyDLL.dll and use this as the source for my Wise script.
I installed the very latest version of Vista on my second machine, installed
VB6, updated all the third party components and installed the latest version
of my apps, using setups I generated from Wise scripts, to equalise the
Vista machine with my production machine. (Win XP SP2 and very much up to
date).

When I tried to compile a DLL, I got a standard message that I dont have
permission. And a string with the target file name. I can compile to another
folder but nothing in c:\Program Files\etc etc etc

Am I doing something wrong. Obviously I have administrator permissions.

Kudnt find Outlook Express there too so I am contacting you from my
production machine.

Vista can be very very frustrating to an experienced user of XP 'cos some
things are missing completely OR in different places. I feel old..

"Ralph" wrote in message @arkansas.net...
>
> "Garry" wrote in message
> @TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Which newsgroup shud I use to ask questions about Vista and problems
>> compiling VB6 DLLs there?????
>>
>
> Here is probably as good a place as any (while theoretically ~.vb.com is
> the
> more appropriate site). This group and ~.vb.general.discussion have
> perhaps
> the most activity.
>
> So what did M$ break this time?
>
> -ralph
>
>

Ralph · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4148

"Garry" wrote in message@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Well, I compile directly to c:\ProgramFiles\Common
> Files\CompanyName\MyDLL.dll and use this as the source for my Wise script.
> I installed the very latest version of Vista on my second machine,
installed
> VB6, updated all the third party components and installed the latest
version
> of my apps, using setups I generated from Wise scripts, to equalise the
> Vista machine with my production machine. (Win XP SP2 and very much up to
> date).
>
> When I tried to compile a DLL, I got a standard message that I dont have
> permission. And a string with the target file name. I can compile to
another
> folder but nothing in c:\Program Files\etc etc etc
>
> Am I doing something wrong. Obviously I have administrator permissions.
>
> Kudnt find Outlook Express there too so I am contacting you from my
> production machine.
>
> Vista can be very very frustrating to an experienced user of XP 'cos some
> things are missing completely OR in different places. I feel old..
>

If I understand you correctly, then yes these areas are now off-limits by
default. The idea is to eventually deny all access to 'special folders'
except thru a specific 'install/gatekeeper'. Admin alone doesn't always
carry the weight it once did. Which leads to strange situations like
yours.

There are numerous subtle changes to permission and ownership rules in
Vista. I will not pretend to understand them at this time. Also be aware, as
I am sure you are, that Vista is still beta. It is difficult at times to
determine if is 'Me', their feature, or their bug.

You can over-ride the behavior you are seeing, but IMHO it is better if you
compile to another folder and then 'install' the file to where you want it.
After all you might as well get used to it as it is only going to get worse.

-ralph

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

Yes. I imagined that was the direction that MS was going BUT, I thought that
I was working according to Microsoft Best Practices as I used to compile
directly to the Sys32 folder. Sometimes Microsoft is never satisfied.

Thanks for the replys

Garry

"Ralph" wrote in message @arkansas.net...
>
> "Garry" wrote in message
> @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Well, I compile directly to c:\ProgramFiles\Common
>> Files\CompanyName\MyDLL.dll and use this as the source for my Wise
>> script.
>> I installed the very latest version of Vista on my second machine,
> installed
>> VB6, updated all the third party components and installed the latest
> version
>> of my apps, using setups I generated from Wise scripts, to equalise the
>> Vista machine with my production machine. (Win XP SP2 and very much up to
>> date).
>>
>> When I tried to compile a DLL, I got a standard message that I dont have
>> permission. And a string with the target file name. I can compile to
> another
>> folder but nothing in c:\Program Files\etc etc etc
>>
>> Am I doing something wrong. Obviously I have administrator permissions.
>>
>> Kudnt find Outlook Express there too so I am contacting you from my
>> production machine.
>>
>> Vista can be very very frustrating to an experienced user of XP 'cos some
>> things are missing completely OR in different places. I feel old..
>>
>
>
> If I understand you correctly, then yes these areas are now off-limits by
> default. The idea is to eventually deny all access to 'special folders'
> except thru a specific 'install/gatekeeper'. Admin alone doesn't always
> carry the weight it once did. Which leads to strange situations like
> yours.
>
> There are numerous subtle changes to permission and ownership rules in
> Vista. I will not pretend to understand them at this time. Also be aware,
> as
> I am sure you are, that Vista is still beta. It is difficult at times to
> determine if is 'Me', their feature, or their bug.
>
> You can over-ride the behavior you are seeing, but IMHO it is better if
> you
> compile to another folder and then 'install' the file to where you want
> it.
> After all you might as well get used to it as it is only going to get
> worse.
>
>
> -ralph
>
>

Ralph · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4148

"Garry" wrote in message@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Yes. I imagined that was the direction that MS was going BUT, I thought
that
> I was working according to Microsoft Best Practices as I used to compile
> directly to the Sys32 folder. Sometimes Microsoft is never satisfied.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the replys
>
> Garry
>

To be strickly accurate I should emphasize that is my best guess as to what
is going on. We have seen the behavior, but lack any 'official'
pronouncement.

Getting complete answers from M$ about Classic VB and COM is not easy. It
puts me in mind of the old days of the Oracle/M$ 'wars'. If you called
either support line and mentioned the other - all you got was immediate
silence.

So for the future, your best bet with any issue is to try and duplicate the
behavior with a non-VB app or COM component, and then ask about it.

-ralph

Michael C · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 1831

"Ralph" wrote in message @arkansas.net...
> So for the future, your best bet with any issue is to try and duplicate
> the
> behavior with a non-VB app or COM component, and then ask about it.

Just trying to create a txt file in prog files should determine that it is
not a vb issue.

>
> -ralph
>
>

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

Well yes, it is not directly a vb6 issue but it is very pertinent to those
who wish to continue to compile VB6 DLLs.

"Michael C" wrote in message %23$K1GHA.4264@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Ralph" wrote in message
> @arkansas.net...
>> So for the future, your best bet with any issue is to try and duplicate
>> the
>> behavior with a non-VB app or COM component, and then ask about it.
>
> Just trying to create a txt file in prog files should determine that it is
> not a vb issue.
>
>>
>> -ralph
>>
>>
>
>

Karl E. Peterson · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4836

Garry wrote:
> Well yes, it is not directly a vb6 issue but it is very pertinent to
> those who wish to continue to compile VB6 DLLs.

If you compile to your own profile, you're set. Otherwise, MS considers you
to be a very bad boy indeed. Here's some further reading:

http://www.google.com/search?q=vista+%22user+protection%22
--
Working without a .NET?
http://classicvb.org/

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

Well, the response has to be rather lengthy.
We iz two programmers working on various projects in VB6 so we have to
compile DLLs to a common folder. That leaves out a named user folder.
We need the folder to be on a destination machine AND locked to the end
user.
The %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName folder was ideal for this as
the end user, if using the Windows Explorer was warned before having the
contents of Program Files being displayed to him in XP assuming he was an
Admin. If he was a Limited User, he couldn't change anything in Program
Files anyway..
If it is locked to him in Vista, even as an Administrator, as many home
users will be, so much the better. But WE need the Common Files\CompanyName
folder on our production machines to be 'open' to insert newly compilled
DLLs and as source file DLLs in Wise Script..
The solution offered here to 'open' the Common Files\CompanyName satisfyes
our requirements without compromising the end user's machine. That is, I
think, wot Microsoft intended.

"Karl E. Peterson" wrote in message @TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Garry wrote:
>> Well yes, it is not directly a vb6 issue but it is very pertinent to
>> those who wish to continue to compile VB6 DLLs.
>
> If you compile to your own profile, you're set. Otherwise, MS considers
> you
> to be a very bad boy indeed. Here's some further reading:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=vista+%22user+protection%22
> --
> Working without a .NET?
> http://classicvb.org/
>
>

Karl E. Peterson · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4836

Garry wrote:
> Well, the response has to be rather lengthy.

Personally, I often take the *inverse* of Microsoft's "recommendatations" to
be "best practice." This notion of only being able to write to your own
profile, while it may make sense for the kid running the cash register, is
ludicrous for actual knowledge workers.
--
Working without a .NET?
http://classicvb.org/

> We iz two programmers working on various projects in VB6 so we have to
> compile DLLs to a common folder. That leaves out a named user folder.
> We need the folder to be on a destination machine AND locked to the
> end user.
> The %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName folder was ideal for
> this as the end user, if using the Windows Explorer was warned before
> having the contents of Program Files being displayed to him in XP
> assuming he was an Admin. If he was a Limited User, he couldn't
> change anything in Program Files anyway..
> If it is locked to him in Vista, even as an Administrator, as many
> home users will be, so much the better. But WE need the Common
> Files\CompanyName folder on our production machines to be 'open' to
> insert newly compilled DLLs and as source file DLLs in Wise Script..
> The solution offered here to 'open' the Common Files\CompanyName
> satisfyes our requirements without compromising the end user's
> machine. That is, I think, wot Microsoft intended.
>
>
>
> "Karl E. Peterson" wrote in message
> @TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Garry wrote:
>>> Well yes, it is not directly a vb6 issue but it is very pertinent to
>>> those who wish to continue to compile VB6 DLLs.
>>
>> If you compile to your own profile, you're set. Otherwise, MS
>> considers you
>> to be a very bad boy indeed. Here's some further reading:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=vista+%22user+protection%22
>> --
>> Working without a .NET?
>> http://classicvb.org/

Ralph · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4148

"Karl E. Peterson" wrote in message$Hi3o1GHA.4388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Garry wrote:
> > Well, the response has to be rather lengthy.
>
> Personally, I often take the *inverse* of Microsoft's "recommendatations"
to
> be "best practice." This notion of only being able to write to your own
> profile, while it may make sense for the kid running the cash register, is
> ludicrous for actual knowledge workers.
> --
> Working without a .NET?
> http://classicvb.org/
>

If you think that is fun wait until you try to write drivers and/or debug
services on YOUR OWN DAMN BOX!

I know this is silly, but I wouldn't be surprised that Vista will be
Released in three versions: Home, Professional, and for another hundred
dollars - a developer's edition.

Or perhaps a MSDN subscription will become manditory.

-ralph

Ken Halter · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4150

"Garry" wrote in message @TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Yes. I imagined that was the direction that MS was going BUT, I thought
> that I was working according to Microsoft Best Practices as I used to
> compile directly to the Sys32 folder. Sometimes Microsoft is never
> satisfied.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the replys
>
> Garry

"Microsoft Best Practices" should be "Microsoft Best Practices for today"

fwiw, I compile directly into the folder that contains the source.
Afterwards, I copy the new component to a release folder.

imo, the Sys32 folder and the registry should remain as clean as you can
possibly keep them. I've never seen Vista installed anywhere so I haven't
got a clue about it's quirks. I do know that anything from Microsoft that's
labelled BETA, will not be installed on any PC I care about. Their RTM
versions are scary enough these days with their "release it, get bug reports
from poor, unsuspecting users, ignore those reports while working on the
next cash cow" policies they seem to have these days. Everyone and
everything at Microsoft is disposable these days, it seems. (do I seem
bitter? )

--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB - Please keep all discussions in the groups..
In Loving Memory - http://www.vbsight.com/Remembrance.htm

Garry · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 31

I agree.

And Microsoft haz provided two possibilities as explained to me in the above
answers.

a) Make the target Folder %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName
accessable for read/write by an Admin user on my production machine. I am
the only user.

b) Enable VB6.exe to 'Admin enabled' and it will then be able to write to
the %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName folder without me changing the
write permissions for that folder.

And, I agree with Microsoft. I may have had to learn something by writing to
these newsgroups, but the basic Microsoft permissions policy seems VERY
SOUND to me.

The info on how to adjust the permissions may even be written in some
obscure place in the help files where only Google will find it.

Garry

"Karl E. Peterson" wrote in message $Hi3o1GHA.4388@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Garry wrote:
>> Well, the response has to be rather lengthy.
>
> Personally, I often take the *inverse* of Microsoft's "recommendatations"
> to
> be "best practice." This notion of only being able to write to your own
> profile, while it may make sense for the kid running the cash register, is
> ludicrous for actual knowledge workers.
> --
> Working without a .NET?
> http://classicvb.org/
>
>
>
>> We iz two programmers working on various projects in VB6 so we have to
>> compile DLLs to a common folder. That leaves out a named user folder.
>> We need the folder to be on a destination machine AND locked to the
>> end user.
>> The %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName folder was ideal for
>> this as the end user, if using the Windows Explorer was warned before
>> having the contents of Program Files being displayed to him in XP
>> assuming he was an Admin. If he was a Limited User, he couldn't
>> change anything in Program Files anyway..
>> If it is locked to him in Vista, even as an Administrator, as many
>> home users will be, so much the better. But WE need the Common
>> Files\CompanyName folder on our production machines to be 'open' to
>> insert newly compilled DLLs and as source file DLLs in Wise Script..
>> The solution offered here to 'open' the Common Files\CompanyName
>> satisfyes our requirements without compromising the end user's
>> machine. That is, I think, wot Microsoft intended.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Karl E. Peterson" wrote in message
>> @TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Garry wrote:
>>>> Well yes, it is not directly a vb6 issue but it is very pertinent to
>>>> those who wish to continue to compile VB6 DLLs.
>>>
>>> If you compile to your own profile, you're set. Otherwise, MS
>>> considers you
>>> to be a very bad boy indeed. Here's some further reading:
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=vista+%22user+protection%22
>>> --
>>> Working without a .NET?
>>> http://classicvb.org/
>
>
>

Ralph · Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 4148

"Garry" wrote in message
news:%23qoqgAw1GHA.4648@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I agree.
>
> And Microsoft haz provided two possibilities as explained to me in the
above
> answers.
>
> a) Make the target Folder %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName
> accessable for read/write by an Admin user on my production machine. I am
> the only user.
>
> b) Enable VB6.exe to 'Admin enabled' and it will then be able to write
to
> the %Program Files%\Common Files\CompanyName folder without me changing
the
> write permissions for that folder.
>
> And, I agree with Microsoft. I may have had to learn something by writing
to
> these newsgroups, but the basic Microsoft permissions policy seems VERY
> SOUND to me.
>
> The info on how to adjust the permissions may even be written in some
> obscure place in the help files where only Google will find it.
>
> Garry
>

While I definitely sounded like I was complaining about the new 'security' -
it was more the childish whining of a gerontoprogrammer who finds himself
annoyed by changes. It is uncomfortable, after all these years of being the
absolute Master of My Domain, to be suddenly faced with insubordination over
a request to perform a trivial task.

In the long run making the attack surfaces smaller by default is good thing.
But it sure is a PITA!

-ralph