[Gdal-dev] Building with Visual C++ 2005 Express

[Simon Perkins]

I'm having some problems building GDAL (latest CVS version) on windows 
using Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition. I've downloaded and installed the 
Platform SDK as suggested by the Microsoft install intructions, but am 
running into a missing ATL library problem:

--

...
 link /dll /debug /INCLUDE:_OGRFeatureStylePuller  /INCLUDE:_OSRValidate
 /INCLUDE:_OPTGetProjectionMethods  /INCLUDE:_OGR_G_GetPointCount  
/INCLUDE:_OGR
RegisterAll /INCLUDE:_GDALSimpleImageWarp at 36  
/INCLUDE:_GDALReprojectImage at 48  /
INCLUDE:_GDALComputeMedianCutPCT at 32  /INCLUDE:_GDALDitherRGB2PCT at 28  
/INCLUDE:_v
bSafeArrayToPtr at 16  /INCLUDE:_OCTNewCoordinateTransformation at 8 
port\*.obj gcore\
*.obj alg\*.obj frmts\o\*.obj ogr\ogrsf_frmts\ogrsf_frmts.lib 
ogr\ogr.lib vb6\vb
6_support.obj      odbc32.lib                        gcore\Version.res  
/out:gda
l13.dll /implib:gdal_i.lib
Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 8.00.50727.42
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file 'atlthunk.lib'
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 
8\VC\BIN\l
ink.EXE"' : return code '0x450'
Stop.

--

The library atlthunk.lib doesn't appear to exist anywhere on my machine. 
Doing a google search reveals some articles which suggest that the ATL 
libraries are not included in visual c++ 2005 express, and that I should 
install a full version instead. Discussion at:

http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/showpost.aspx?postid=64509&siteid=1

(you'll need to log on to the MSDN forum to read this).


Has anyone else had any luck building GDAL with Visual C++ 2005 Express? 
The ATL library seems to be only required for some VB6 backwards 
compatibility, so is there some easy way of disabling that requirement? 
Or am I going to have to shell out for Visual Studio 2005 Standard? 
(assuming that includes ATL?) I do also have VS 2003 .NET available, but 
I'm also using C# 2.0 (which requires Visual C# 2005) and so I'd rather 
not reinstall 2003 unless I really have to.

Cheers,

Simon