Nope......CLASSES_ROOT replicates down to the LOCAL_MACHINE hive automatically.

>One more quick question, John. Can you tell me if it's also necessary to make a similar change to the registry entry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\Visual.FoxPro.Application.6\EditFlags, in addition to the one under HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT?
>
>Mike
>
>>Hi Mike,
>>
>>I'll pass on the issue about advpack.dll and Win98. Thanks for letting me know about that.
>>
>>Meanwhile, the main issue of the patch is a registry entry. In the entry HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Visual.FoxPro.Application.6 is the name EditFlags with data set at REG_BINARY 00 00 01 00. For maximum security, this value should actually be set to 00 00 00 00. This is what the patch does and nothing more.
>>
>>This has the same effect as setting confirmations for any file types using the UI for Folder Options.
>>
>>So, the upshot here is that if you put code in your app Main or in a VFP-based post-setup executable to look for this registry entry and change it as indicated (perhaps using the FFC reg classes), the problem goes away.
>>
>>Simple changing this reg entry in your Fox code should resolve your issue. Please let me know if this helps.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Thanks for replying. I gathered that something along these lines would be required, and tried what you suggested. (The /Q option is the one required to run the patch quietly.) Unfortunately, it seems that one cannot pass any arguments to a post-setup executable, contrary to what the VFP Help file says about this.
>>>
>>>I got around that limitation by creating a VFP-based PSE and having it invoke the patch via a RUN command. In my testing on an old Windows 95 machine, however, I encountered an error when the patch was run, with the complaint "Advpack.dll is required to install on this system". That's interesting, because an examination of vfp_q326568_en.exe via WinZip reveals that it contains advpack.dll, along with 2 smaller DLLs.
>>>
>>>So I tried extracting these DLLs and incorporating them into the Setup Wizard's list of files in the distribution directory, and I told the Setup Wizard to install these in the Windows system directory. I also kept the PSE logic that invokes vfp_q326568_en.exe as well. Sorry to say, that did not work: it still gripes that advpack.dll is required.
>>>
>>>All of this seems like quite a headache, considering that the net effect is supposed to be equivalent to simply checking the "Confirm open after download" box for .APP files, or making a tiny adjustment in the registry. I realize that you guys are busy getting VFP8 ready, but you do still support VFP6, and most people are still using it, n'est ce pas? It would sure be great if, short of actually fixing the Setup Wizard, you could supply the VFP code to perform the registry update directly in a post-setup executable.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>>>Hi Mike,
>>>>
>>>>The patch does registry entry adjustments and does not modify any EXEs or DLLs, so the answer is that Setups created are not "patched". After you have applied the patch, when you create future setups, you can include the EXE into your setup as the "post-installation executable" and run it in silent mode (run the patch EXE with /? or /Help for details on silent mode).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I wonder if you could clarify whether the VFP6 security patch referred to in Q326568 - MS02-049 affects runtime distributions made via the Setup Wizard. I.e. if I build a setup.exe via the Wizard after applying the patch on my own development system, does this fix get installed on the end user's machine when they run my setup program? The KB article and TechNet Security Bulletin are not altogether clear on this point.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike