No subject

Microsoft&#39;s compiler. However, the DLLs here use the <tt>msvcrt.dll</tt=
>
run-time library. This means that also applications that use the DLLs
should preferrably use the <tt>msvcrt.dll</tt> run-time. Specifically,
this means that you should not use newer versions of the Microsoft
compiler than Visual C++ 6 without knowing exactly what you are doing.<br>
  </blockquote>
Which makes me believe that we should build our own binaries if we want
to use Visual Studio &gt; 6.0 (e.g. 2008). MSVCR90.dll may not be
msvcrt.dll but still I sense a connection, or at least a potential
other problem.<br>
  <br>
Willi &quot;Mr. Wonko&quot; Schinmeyer<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
Yep that&#39;s completely right. Missing different versions of the runtime
DLL can lead to problems with memory allocation and freeing across DLL
boundaries and other subtle stability issues.<br>
<br>
It does sound like Rambetter was able to get rid of the recently added
binary dependencies though. If that&#39;s the case we should be on a
complete VC6 / Visual Studio 2005 solution from the gtk binary
dependencies side. I don&#39;t know if there is an Express edition (e.g.
free) for 2005 though .. so we may still want to look at compiling the
latest gtk for ourselves on 2008 (or even 2010).<br>
<br>
Another direction could be to move the whole infrastructure to the
mingw compiler, but I worry about build times, on the EC2 box anything
using mingw was horribly slow.<br>
<br>
TTimo<br>
<br>
</div>

<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Gtkradiant mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Gtkradiant at zerowing.idsoftware.com">Gtkradiant at zerowing.i=
dsoftware.com</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://zerowing.idsoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gtkradia=
nt" target=3D"_blank">http://zerowing.idsoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listin=
fo/gtkradiant</a><br></blockquote></div><br>

--00163646d7daaef3bb049725b204--