From: Karl E. Peterson on 10 Mar 2010 16:40 Tom Shelton wrote: > On 2010-03-10, Karl E Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: >> Tom Shelton wrote: >>> On 2010-03-10, Karl E Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: >>>> Tom Shelton wrote: >>>>> On 2010-03-10, mayayana <mayayana(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> � > It's really a shame that Microsoft wrote COM and .NET code wrappers >>>>>>> for � this API stuff isn't it. >>>>>>> � > Otherwise, we would all be coding in C++. ;-) >>>>>>> � >>>>>>> � I'm not doing either. Odd, huh? >>>>>>> � >>>>>>> Is that supposed to be intellectual honesty? ;-) >>>>>>> If you are using VB 6.0 then you are certainly using COM wrappers. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah, the famous Paul C. context switcheroo. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me see if I've got this straight. You've >>>>>> just defended the choice of running VBScripts >>>>>> (that are shelling to sysadmin applets) via your >>>>>> 300 MB slop of superfluous wrappers, as >>>>>> preferable to using the API for setting permissions. >>>>>> >>>>>> ...And you equate your 300 MB script hack with >>>>>> using the VB intrinsic controls...because both >>>>>> involve wrappers. >>>>>> >>>>>> I understand now. You're a binary thinker! Am >>>>>> I actually having this conversation with a computer >>>>>> program? .... Oh... my.... I'm so embarassed! >>>>> >>>>> Not sure why he would be advocating that - since it's trivial to set acls >>>>> from within the framework (System.Security.AccessControl). I do it all >>>>> the time from my custom deployment tool. >>>> >>>> Because he was "answering" someone who wanted to do it with VB6!!! >>> >>> So, why is dotnet even in the conversation? >> >> Rhetorical question? (If not, what should be the obvious answer is, >> because Paul's here!) > > Hmmm... maybe I need to read up the thread. I just was trying to figure out > why someone was suggesting a call to a shell script to do something that can > be done natively.... Yeah, you're not the only one. In fact, on that count, you are basically channelling mayayana word for word. -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Paul Clement on 11 Mar 2010 08:08 On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:06:09 -0800, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote: � >> Because he was "answering" someone who wanted to do it with VB6!!! � > � > So, why is dotnet even in the conversation? � � Rhetorical question? (If not, what should be the obvious answer is, � because Paul's here!) Yes, it's amazing how much mind control I can exercise with just my newsgroup presence. I can induce anyone to start spewing about .NET without even mentioning it myself. I guess they just can't help themselves. ;-) Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Paul Clement on 11 Mar 2010 08:20 On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:22:29 -0800, Tom Shelton <tom_shelton(a)comcastXXXXXXX.net> wrote: � >> So, why is dotnet even in the conversation? Because mayayana brought it up. � > � > Rhetorical question? (If not, what should be the obvious answer is, � > because Paul's here!) � > � � Hmmm... maybe I need to read up the thread. I just was trying to figure out � why someone was suggesting a call to a shell script to do something that can � be done natively.... I offered two suggestions, both of which where relatively easy to code (which is why I mentioned them). One used the script method and the other used ADSI. Mayayana suggested the Windows API. Easy enough to let the OP decide which method to use, but no, someone had to get their undies in a bundle over my suggestions Unlike .NET (sorry) there are no native functions or components in VB 6.0 that enable you to do this. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Karl E. Peterson on 11 Mar 2010 12:43
Paul Clement wrote: > I can induce anyone to start spewing I think you misspelled "retching" but it's essentially the same either way, so, no biggie... -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org |