Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution
From: Gary S. Terhune (grystnews_at_mvps.org)
Date: 01/27/04
- Next message: GINA Ross: "Re: How do I get secur32.dll for Windows NT?"
- Previous message: Boris Nikitin: "CryptDllEncodePublicKeyAndParameters"
- In reply to: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Next in thread: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Reply: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:51:55 -0800
Sorry, I focused on one aspect of your post and failed to consider the larger
picture. Let's see if I can remedy that.
Am I right in assuming, from the way you couch this, that your program and its
functions do not involve a Win 2000 generation server in any way? If that is the
case, then I doubt redistributing dsclient.exe is a legal usage. Are the two
DLLs in your Subject line the only ones involved? If so, which versions? Only
the ones available in dsclient.exe?
Suggest you see
http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/fileversion/dllinfo.asp and research
the versions available for each, and their distribution. Note that schannel.dll
has an Export version, which I take to mean that certain versions are probably
*not* for export outside the US.
>From what I infer from the article, the expected method of distribution for
dsclient.exe is for the server administrator to make dsclient.exe available for
network installation, download to the client, or even pushed.
If the functionality of the program involves Win2K-based server(s) and all you
wish to do is make the client available in a more convenient manner, then I see
no problem in redistributing the EXE--which you would get from a WinServer CD.
However, in all other cases, I suspect that MDAC updates, VBRUN service packs,
or any number of other redistributables would be the more kosher method, and
probably more appropriate, considering the "packaged" nature of these runtime
libraries. If you can provide me with the DLL names and versions required, I can
fairly easily see which packages and which versions would satisfy your needs (I
have most of them on my HD, and the rest of them somewhere in this mess.)
At least, that's the way I see it. I can't comment on alternative code. Not my
thing.
-- Gary S. Terhune MS MVP for Windows 9x "Matthew S" <mls@bitstream.net> wrote in message news:Xns947D7A6B2770Amlsignorethisbitstre@207.46.248.16... > "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews@mvps.org> wrote in > news:e6e2dvP5DHA.2572@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl: > > > Would seem to me, from this reading, that the license to DSClient > > derives from the server and that any client of a licensed server can > > install it. > > Gary, thanks for your thoughts. > > While I might infer this as well, it does make it difficult for the the > end user to install software based on these libraries. It would be easier > to include the libraries, or dsclient.exe as part of the installation > package. > > Considering that the correct versions of these libraries are included > with Windows ME, 2000 and XP, and are available as you pointed out for NT > 4.0, would it be reasonable to distribute them for users of Windows 98? > While not stated that this is reasonable or not in any document I am > aware of, it would seem silly to restrict these updated libraries when > they are available freely for most other Microsoft platforms. > > Also, consider the situation of a small business or home user who does > not have access to the Windows 2000 server CD. How do they gain access to > these libraries. > > While I don't encourage the use of Windows 98, I understand that some > users have reasons that keep them on that platform. I know that one of > our beta sites is primarily Windows 98, and probably won't change in the > next year. In the mean time, I either need to find a way to support those > installations, or rewrite the affected portions of the code for Windows > 98. > > At the moment, I am looking for a way to support those installations in a > legal way. Or, in failing that, a recommended approach or replacement for > the offending code. > > Thanks. > > -Matthew > > >
- Next message: GINA Ross: "Re: How do I get secur32.dll for Windows NT?"
- Previous message: Boris Nikitin: "CryptDllEncodePublicKeyAndParameters"
- In reply to: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Next in thread: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Reply: Matthew S: "Re: schannel.dll, secur32.dll, and DSCLIENT.EXE redistribution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
