Looks like I have opened a can of worms here!!!
From what I can tell then there is no immediate answer apart from, slightly dubiously, including the dll with my download, or linking to somewhere where you can download it - i have already found a couple of sites online if people want the links and then they themselves are not really doing anything dodgy!
Cheers for all the replies thus far...makes an interesting read!
D3DX9_24.dll
Quote:Original post by ols
Looks like I have opened a can of worms here!!!
From what I can tell then there is no immediate answer apart from, slightly dubiously, including the dll with my download, or linking to somewhere where you can download it - i have already found a couple of sites online if people want the links and then they themselves are not really doing anything dodgy!
Cheers for all the replies thus far...makes an interesting read!
Whoa...you can't do that right? Distributing the DLL on your own is against the EULA isn't it? (I thought that's what this thread was aboot!)
this is an especially jading experience for me.
I'm trying to write my first book on game programming using DirectX and what happens:
-DirectPlay is kaiboshed
-DirectMusic is beaten, tossed and buried
-Now the D3DX DLL "issues"
*sigh*
(To make it worse, I'm not even 100% positive that the book's code will work once it ships in Q4...there's 2 more DX SDK "updates" between now and then!)
Oh the humanity!
Quote:Original post by wazoo69
Whoa...you can't do that right? Distributing the DLL on your own is against the EULA isn't it? (I thought that's what this thread was aboot!)
Good question...if you crack open the redist folder, you will see many files, including:
*MONTH*2005_d3dx9_*_x64.cab
*MONTH*2005_d3dx9_*_x86.cab
So, I suppose that you are still supposed to just give your users the redistributables. That package will then install the D3DX DLL.
Quote:Original post by wazoo69Quote:Original post by ols
Looks like I have opened a can of worms here!!!
From what I can tell then there is no immediate answer apart from, slightly dubiously, including the dll with my download, or linking to somewhere where you can download it - i have already found a couple of sites online if people want the links and then they themselves are not really doing anything dodgy!
Cheers for all the replies thus far...makes an interesting read!
Whoa...you can't do that right? Distributing the DLL on your own is against the EULA isn't it? (I thought that's what this thread was aboot!)
this is an especially jading experience for me.
I'm trying to write my first book on game programming using DirectX and what happens:
-DirectPlay is kaiboshed
-DirectMusic is beaten, tossed and buried
-Now the D3DX DLL "issues"
*sigh*
(To make it worse, I'm not even 100% positive that the book's code will work once it ships in Q4...there's 2 more DX SDK "updates" between now and then!)
Oh the humanity!
If you are shipping a copy of the SDK with the book or pointing people at a version of the SDK, you should be fine as the SDK installs d3dx9_xx.dll during setup.
Paul Bleisch
Quote:From what I can tell then there is no immediate answer
What's hard about downloading the December 2004 SDK and linking with that? It doesn't have the D3DX DLL problem; it's a static library in release mode in Dec04. There's not THAT much difference between Dec04 and Apr05.
Quote:
What's hard about downloading the December 2004 SDK and linking with that? It doesn't have the D3DX DLL problem; it's a static library in release mode in Dec04. There's not THAT much difference between Dec04 and Apr05.
It is. AFAIR The ID3DXFont interface is much better in latest releases.
Quote:Original post by SirMikeQuote:
What's hard about downloading the December 2004 SDK and linking with that? It doesn't have the D3DX DLL problem; it's a static library in release mode in Dec04. There's not THAT much difference between Dec04 and Apr05.
It is. AFAIR The ID3DXFont interface is much better in latest releases.
Well I suppose it'd be a simple choice:
- If you need the latest-and-greatest features, learn to adapt/live with the whole dynamic D3DX DLL issue.
- If you can get by without the latest-and-greatest, use the older statically linked D3DX.
[smile]
Jack
Quote:Original post by SirMikeQuote:
What's hard about downloading the December 2004 SDK and linking with that? It doesn't have the D3DX DLL problem; it's a static library in release mode in Dec04. There's not THAT much difference between Dec04 and Apr05.
It is. AFAIR The ID3DXFont interface is much better in latest releases.
I don't have my release notes handy but I don't believe any significant changes were made to D3DXFont over that time period.
Not much has changed but it is a pain to have to stay with the December release - I suspect a lot of people are doing so because of this. I have an app (T2) that I could rebuild with the later SDK but then I would be stuck as users would not have the dll, I am not allowed to include it and to include the redistributable would make the T2 download huge and probably break my bandwidth.
What has happpened in effect is that Microsoft have release DirectX 9.0d but not admitted to/realised it :) By moving D3DX into a .dll they have made the runtime required for the latest SDK different from Directx 9.0c. I can understand why they have done it but all they have to do to fix it is to allow us to distribute just the dll.
What has happpened in effect is that Microsoft have release DirectX 9.0d but not admitted to/realised it :) By moving D3DX into a .dll they have made the runtime required for the latest SDK different from Directx 9.0c. I can understand why they have done it but all they have to do to fix it is to allow us to distribute just the dll.
Quote:Original post by Trip99Or just release "DX 9.0d" [smile]
What has happpened in effect is that Microsoft have release DirectX 9.0d but not admitted to/realised it :) By moving D3DX into a .dll they have made the runtime required for the latest SDK different from Directx 9.0c. I can understand why they have done it but all they have to do to fix it is to allow us to distribute just the dll.
Even if all it includes is a few versions of the D3DX DLL, users will still download and install it if Windows Update says it's needed. Of course I understand that there's a lot of users who won't, but at least this way you can blame the user. As it is, the user just turns around and says "Oh, but I already have the latest DirectX version, so it must be your program".
Hopefully all this will be sorted soon though.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
