Closed dblock closed 10 years ago
@vladaver Maybe you want to take a look at other instances of this since you got your hands in the project?
OK, will do it later this week
Vlad
From: Daniel Doubrovkine (dB.) @dblockdotorg [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 11:05 AM To: dblock/msiext Cc: Vlad Averchenkov Subject: Re: [msiext] Standardize SERVICE_NAME parameter in Service CAs (#7)
@vladaverhttps://github.com/vladaver Maybe you want to take a look at other instances of this since you got your hands in the project?
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/dblock/msiext/issues/7#issuecomment-42967059.
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
Resolved via https://github.com/dblock/msiext/pull/13.
We have
Service_Exists
that takes aSERVICE_NAME
, howeverService_ChangeBinaryPathName
takesSERVICE_CHANGE_SERVICE_NAME
. We should support both, the more specific backward compatible one, and a less specificSERVICE_NAME
when unavailable.