[Gdal-dev] Proposal for Unified Windows Binaries
Mateusz Loskot
mateusz at loskot.net
Tue Apr 17 15:30:49 EDT 2007
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Howard Butler wrote:
>> I think an "official" Windows GDAL release should have the following
>> traits:
>> - All optional drivers built as plugins and all other drivers built in
>> - No scripting bindings
>> - No Python utilities
>> - Include the .lib files
>
> Howard,
>
> Presumably it would also include the include files? By .lib files to you
> just mean the stub library for the DLL or static libraries as well? I'd
> rather avoid static libraries which are much harder to arrange on windows
> when there are dependencies, and where are very sensitive to difference in
> compiler version, and build options. The C API used from a DLL should be
> fairly save across compiler versions and mixes of build options.
>
> So where do we go from here? Should we get Mateusz to prepare initial
> binaries for 1.4.1 based on the suggested pattern?
Folks,
What compiler should we use to prepare official binaries for Windows?
I have only legal copy of Visual C++ 2005 Professional.
I don't have 2003 or may be I could have it if we are OK to use Visual
C++ 2003 Toolkig (already deprecated by Microsoft).
Unfortunately, I don't have any access to Visual C++ 6.0.
Cheers
--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
More information about the Gdal-dev
mailing list