One of my least favorite things to build
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
I've never had an issue with them, in C#.
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
Trust me, a Windows device driver is even worse!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
Trust me, a Windows device driver is even worse!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
Trust me, a Windows device driver is even worse!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
Oh, I agree, and I avoid them.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
-
I've never had an issue with them, in C#.
It really depends on what you're doing, particularly the permissions under which the service operates.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
-
Trust me, a Windows device driver is even worse!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
Ever tried a Cryptography Provider? Kind of a mix between device driver and service, real fun to debug.
forging iron and new ideas
-
It really depends on what you're doing, particularly the permissions under which the service operates.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
Do you create a dedicated AD service account with the appropriate permissions and assign execution to that account?
There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas SowellA day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Bill Watterson (Calvin & Hobbes) -
Do you create a dedicated AD service account with the appropriate permissions and assign execution to that account?
There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas SowellA day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Bill Watterson (Calvin & Hobbes)I'm not dealing with Active Directory, no. At least not for what I'm currently doing. It would be overkill.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
Relationships
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
It looks like Windows service developers spend almost all their time, solving the problems with permissions, user accounts and Desktop access.
-
A windows service. It's not even the service part itself. It's the permissions and the IPC that's typically necessary in order to control it. They should make it simpler or something. I've always hated the windows service architecture anyway.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.