On Nov 19 13:21, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 11/19/2013 12:13 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Why do they have to make such a mess out of a simple function like
> >GetVersionEx?  It returns different OS version numbers based on the
> >existence of a manifest in the executable.  How dense is that?
> >
> >So we have thousands of executables, none of them has a 8.1 manifest.
> >As a result, the uname() function returns OS versions 6.2 rather than
> >6.3.  Aaaaaargh.
> >
> >In cygcheck I added a patch to check dwBuildNumber this morning.  If
> >it's >= 9200, it's 8.1/2012R2, otherwise 8/2012.  But that doesn't
> >fix the OS version number of course.  Sigh.
> >
> >I'm going to tweak the OS version number and I'll do the same in
> >Cygwin's uname function as well.
> 
> Good grief. I suppose I need to add something similar to
> /usr/lib/csih/winProductName.exe...

Looks like it, yes.  What on earth were they thinking?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat