<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Personally I've always used the makefile.vc approach. I find that
fine-grained configuration of the build is much easier by editing
nmake.opt, rather than editing project files. I've never had any real
problems doing it that way though if I was doing more serious GDAL
development under windows (rather than just building release version of
the GDAL libraries) I would prefer project files.<br>
<br>
A while back someone suggested setting up a cmake build and I'd love to
see that. In addition to its cross-platform abilities (e.g. VS 2003 vs
VS 2005 vs gcc), cmake seems offers easy fine-grained configuration,
but generates normal looking VS project files on windows. If only I had
the time...<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Sy<br>
<br>
<br>
Craig Miller wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid005e01c7971d$650fd290$7401a8c0@sherpa" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'd agree with this. Anyone debugging under Windows is most likely setup to
build on their own.
I'm curious... How many of you who debug under Windows use the makefiles
that come with GDAL, and how many of you use Visual Studio Project files
(your own or the VTP ones)?
- I use my own VS Solution and Project Files to build and debug.
Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gdal-dev-bounces@lists.maptools.org">gdal-dev-bounces@lists.maptools.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:gdal-dev-bounces@lists.maptools.org">mailto:gdal-dev-bounces@lists.maptools.org</a>] On Behalf Of Mateusz Loskot
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 10:41 AM
To: Frank Warmerdam
Cc: gdal-dev
Subject: Re: [Gdal-dev] Win32 Binaries
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">My understanding then is that folks with VS2005 cannot use the
*debug* version of GDAL, but can still build their application with
debug and use the release version of GDAL. The downside of course is
that they can't debug into GDAL.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Frank,
Yes, it is correct.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Basically then the gdal_iD.lib and gdal14d.dll are extras for folks
who happen to have VS2003. Others will basically have to use the
release version of GDAL even if they are building their own apps with
debug. If they really want to debug into GDAL then they will need to
build it themselves.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Possible but I think users may be confused which version to use.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">In fact, when we distribute plugins they will need to be specifically
for a release or debug build I imagine. Perhaps it would be simpliest
if I just omit any debug version of stuff from the package?
That way folks won't accidentally try to use it with the wrong version
of the compiler, or run into problems with plugins not working in
debug.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Yes, I believe that would be good.
If someone will want to debug GDAL, we can assume he is able to build GDAL
on his own, what seems to be the best option for very powered users.
Cheers
--
Mateusz Loskot
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mateusz.loskot.net">http://mateusz.loskot.net</a>
_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gdal-dev@lists.maptools.org">Gdal-dev@lists.maptools.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev">http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev</a>
_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gdal-dev@lists.maptools.org">Gdal-dev@lists.maptools.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev">http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>