Windows Vista Forums
Vista Forums Home Join Vista Forums Windows 7 Forum Vista Tutorials Tags
Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.

Go Back   Vista Forums > Vista Newsgroups > Vista General

Vista Tutorial - Re: Vista won't show file version unless extension is changed to DLL

Reply
 
Old 08-12-2007   #1 (permalink)
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
Guest


 
 

Re: Vista won't show file version unless extension is changed to DLL

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 09:52:02 -0700, anon0918

>Please try this yourself: rename a DLL to a different extension (such as
>.asdf). Watch the Version tab disappear under the file's Properties. If you
>switch the extension back, suddenly Vista recognizes the version
>specification. Why is Vista ignoring file versions for custom file
>extensions??


Because arbitrary file extensions are not supposed to have version
tabs (or more specifically, the same structure as code files, which
define such tabs). This, IMO, is a Good Thing.

The extension is what you see, and what you use to assess the
potential behavior of a file. In essence, you assess the risk of a
file according to its type, as shown by the extension.

A file that mis-represents its type by using the wrong extension
should IMO be considered highly suspect. Code is the most dangerous
of file types. Even when not run as code, the processing of
type-specific material (such as displaying a version tab) exposes
internal surfaces of the OS that could contain exoploitable defects.

>We deal extensively with clients using older version of our files, so we
>need to be able to easily see the versions.


Then I would keep the appropriate extensions, and break the name of
the file (e.g. Blah.dll -> Blah3409.dll rather than Blah.dll ->
Blah.xyz). As implied in the example, you could append the build
number to the name and this save yourself a rt-click ;-)

Note that when you rename a file in this way, the registry can track
the change, if that file is referenced from there.

More to the point; note that invalidating the extension doesd not
always break the ability of the code to run, when referenced via a
self-corrected registry setting.

For example, if you rename WScript.exe to WScript.ex! from within
Win98, not only may you see WScript.ex! as the new action command line
for .WSH, .VBS, .JS etc. files, but these files will still "open" just
fine, even though .EX! is not a correct executable extension.

>With XP, we never had this problem. If a file had a version specified, it
>was shown.


Looks like XP was taking greater risks than Vista, in this case.

I approve of the change ;-)


>-- Risk Management is the clue that asks:

"Why do I keep open buckets of petrol next to all the
ashtrays in the lounge, when I don't even have a car?"
>----------------------- ------ ---- --- -- - - - -


My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Forum
Vista won't show file version unless extension is changed to DLL Vista file management
Vista won't show file version unless extension is changed to DLL Vista performance & maintenance
Re: Vista won't show file version Vista file management
Re: Vista won't show file version Vista performance & maintenance
Re: Vista won't show file version unless extension is changed to DLL Vista General


Vista Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized,
sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation.
"Windows Vista", the Start Orb, and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.
© Designer Media Ltd

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46