[Draft] Windows: Add longPathAware manifest file
#1898
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ | ||
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?> | ||
| <assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0" xmlns:asmv3="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v3"> | ||
| <!-- Uniquely identifiy the application (name + version) --> | ||
| <assemblyIdentity | ||
| type="win32" | ||
| name="BurntSushi.github.ripgrep" | ||
| version="13.0.0.0" | ||
| /> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- Supported OS versions --> | ||
| <compatibility xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:compatibility.v1"> | ||
| <application> | ||
| <!-- Windows 7 --><supportedOS Id="{35138b9a-5d96-4fbd-8e2d-a2440225f93a}"/> | ||
| <!-- Windows 8 --><supportedOS Id="{1f676c76-80e1-4239-95bb-83d0f6d0da78}"/> | ||
| <!-- Windows 10 --><supportedOS Id="{8e0f7a12-bfb3-4fe8-b9a5-48fd50a15a9a}"/> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Could you add a comment explaining how to update this stanza when a new version of Windows comes out? |
||
| </application> | ||
| </compatibility> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- Application settings --> | ||
| <asmv3:application> | ||
| <asmv3:windowsSettings | ||
| xmlns:ws16="http://schemas.microsoft.com/SMI/2016/WindowsSettings" | ||
| xmlns:ws19="http://schemas.microsoft.com/SMI/2019/WindowsSettings" | ||
| > | ||
| <!-- Allows using longer paths without special handling --> | ||
| <!-- See: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/fileio/maximum-file-path-limitation?tabs=cmd#enable-long-paths-in-windows-10-version-1607-and-later --> | ||
| <ws16:longPathAware>true</ws16:longPathAware> | ||
| <ws19:activeCodePage>UTF-8</ws19:activeCodePage> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Will this have any harmful effects for versions of Windows older than Windows 10 v 1607? There was a problem hiding this comment. In that case it will be unrecognised so it should be ignored. I will test on a Windows 7 VM to double check. |
||
| </asmv3:windowsSettings> | ||
| </asmv3:application> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- Run the application at the same permission level as the process that started it --> | ||
| <asmv3:trustInfo> | ||
| <security> | ||
| <requestedPrivileges> | ||
| <requestedExecutionLevel level="asInvoker" uiAccess="false" /> | ||
| </requestedPrivileges> | ||
| </security> | ||
| </asmv3:trustInfo> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Is this stanza necessary? What happens if we don't include it? There was a problem hiding this comment. Sure, we can exclude it. The linker will add it back anyway. There was a problem hiding this comment. Great. General philosophy here is to just keep this file as small as possible so that it does the absolute minimum thing required. |
||
| </assembly> | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this required? I try not to put the version number in too many places. Right now, it's in exactly two places, and in the most recent release, I forgot to update one of them.
If it's unavoidable, then I think adding a step to
RELEASE-CHECKLIST.mdwould be the right thing to do.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, I'm actually unsure here. The docs list it as "required" but excluding
assemblyIdentityentirely still seems to work. I was just a bit nervous about breaking with the docs.EDIT: In any case, I don't think the version actually has to be accurate or meaningful. It could just be set to
0.0.0.0There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's go with
0.0.0.0for now until someone complains with a good reason to change what we're doing. :-)