MDAC

Has anyone else come across this?

I have an application originally developed in XP Pro / A2003 which is
deployed to two client machines running the same (ie full version of
Access).

I upgraded to Vista (yeah, I know) and A2007, converted my app, and
have been testing it on a machine running XP with the A2007 runtime
installed.

Amongst the various problems I've had was a referencing error that
(most obviously) resulted in the system not being able to show the
Date and Time variables. Turned out the missing reference was to
MSADOX.DLL (ADO Extensions...), which I understand to be something to
do with MDAC.

Here's the catch; Vista does not use MDAC, but instead uses something
called WDAC. However, this file still has the same name, ie
MSADOX.DLL, so I cannot register the "old" XP MSADOX.DLL on my machine
to correct the reference error.

Any ideas?

Reg

Re: MDAC

On Oct 29, 3:52 am, "Reg (Lincolnshire)" wrote:
> Has anyone else come across this?
>
> I have an application originally developed in XP Pro / A2003 which is
> deployed to two client machines running the same (ie full version of
> Access).
>
> I upgraded to Vista (yeah, I know) and A2007, converted my app, and
> have been testing it on a machine running XP with the A2007 runtime
> installed.
>
> Amongst the various problems I've had was a referencing error that
> (most obviously) resulted in the system not being able to show the
> Date and Time variables. Turned out the missing reference was to
> MSADOX.DLL (ADO Extensions...), which I understand to be something to
> do with MDAC.
>
> Here's the catch; Vista does not use MDAC, but instead uses something
> called WDAC. However, this file still has the same name, ie
> MSADOX.DLL, so I cannot register the "old" XP MSADOX.DLL on my machine
> to correct the reference error.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Reg

1. What happens if you reference the new file?
or
2. With a little work, using some tlb creation utilities available on
the web, you may be able to create an MSADOXnn.tlb file from
MSADOXnn.dll. An MSADOX25.tlb is available for download. A reference
to this file instead of the MSADOXnn.dll may avoid the confusion.
or
3. Of course, you could do what I would do. Many, perhaps all ADOX
calls are redundant; they can be duplicated with simple ADO/SQL calls.
Depending on your use of ADOX, it's quite likely that you can rewrite
these calls, and your reference to ADOX will be unnecessary and can be
removed.

Re: MDAC

On Oct 29, 9:51 am, lyle wrote:
> On Oct 29, 3:52 am, "Reg (Lincolnshire)" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Has anyone else come across this?
>
> > I have an application originally developed in XP Pro / A2003 which is
> > deployed to two client machines running the same (ie full version of
> > Access).
>
> > I upgraded to Vista (yeah, I know) and A2007, converted my app, and
> > have been testing it on a machine running XP with the A2007 runtime
> > installed.
>
> > Amongst the various problems I've had was a referencing error that
> > (most obviously) resulted in the system not being able to show the
> > Date and Time variables. Turned out the missing reference was to
> > MSADOX.DLL (ADO Extensions...), which I understand to be something to
> > do with MDAC.
>
> > Here's the catch; Vista does not use MDAC, but instead uses something
> > called WDAC. However, this file still has the same name, ie
> > MSADOX.DLL, so I cannot register the "old" XP MSADOX.DLL on my machine
> > to correct the reference error.
>
> > Any ideas?
>
> > Reg
>
> 1. What happens if you reference the new file?
> or
> 2. With a little work, using some tlb creation utilities available on
> the web, you may be able to create an MSADOXnn.tlb file from
> MSADOXnn.dll. An MSADOX25.tlb is available for download. A reference
> to this file instead of the MSADOXnn.dll may avoid the confusion.
> or
> 3. Of course, you could do what I would do. Many, perhaps all ADOX
> calls are redundant; they can be duplicated with simple ADO/SQL calls.
> Depending on your use of ADOX, it's quite likely that you can rewrite
> these calls, and your reference to ADOX will be unnecessary and can be
> removed.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hi Lyle,

Thanks for that. I'm taking the latter route. I've decided references
are to be avoided at all costs!

Reg