Dave Page wrote:
> It's rumoured that Andrew Dunstan once said:
> >
> > For daily use I agree that we should also do something. One possibility
> > is to put the DLLs into the bin directory instead of into a separate
> > lib directory. IIRC, Windows executables always search their own
> > location first for wanted DLLs before searching the PATH.
>
> iirc they search the current directory, system32 directory and then the
> path. Moving the .dll's is probably easiest and has least effect on the
> rest of the system - plus, it's easy to do in an installer.
> > Alternatively, we could have the installer modify the system path.
>
> As with the regression test problem you pointed out, that will make 2
> installations on the same machine unfeasible, or at least much more
> awkward.
I am about to post a plan to allow relocatable installs.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073