On 7 Dec 1999, Marcus Sundberg wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christoph Egger) writes:
>
> > On 6 Dec 1999, Marcus Sundberg wrote:
> > > What problems?
> > > There are no problems with *.dll files that I've heard of.
> >
> > Are you really believing that windows isn't broken?
>
> This mailinglist is for discussions about GGI related development,
> not rediculous FUD against any OS, be it broken or not.
>
I know, but you are missunderstanding me.
I said:
> But this should be higher on the priority list for the directx-target,
> to avoid problems with the *.dll-files...
and you said, there are no problems with *.dll-files. So I asked
(perhaps too common, so you misunderstood it, soory), if you never had
typical problems with *.dll-files, i.e. when you install different
versions of one *.dll-file...
That is it, why I suggested, that for the _directx_-target (is related to
GGI) the static-linking-ability should be higher on the priority list.
I hope you understand me correctly now...
Christoph Egger
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
