Yang Tse wrote:
> 2007/3/15, Jonathan Arnold wrote;
>
>> I think they are made via a script, and are not actually part of CVS.
>> Which
>> actually brings up something I've been meaning to say about Windows make
>> files (or .vcproj files). There really should be 8 targets for
>> Visual Studio:
>>
>> 1] Debug & Release DLLs using static VC libs (Code Generation = /MT)
>> 2] Debug & Release DLLs using VC DLLs (Code Generation = /MD)
>> 3] Debug & Release libs using static VC libs (Code Generation = /MT)
>> 4] Debug & Release libs using VC DLLs (Code Generation = /MD)
>
> Target # 1 should not be done, nor supported. If the user wants to
> shoot his feet himself its his problem. If we provide a configuration
> that does it, its ours.
>
> See http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2006-11/0188.html
> http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2007-02/0281.html and
> http://curl.haxx.se/mail/lib-2007-03/0011.html

Just out of curiosity, why do you say that? I read the email links but
I don't see any definitive reason why statically linking a DLL is a "bad
thing". Just because we're delivering the curllib.dll doesn't mean we are
also promising a delivery of the MS support DLLs. In fact, #1 is precisely
how we deliver curl, and it hasn't caused us any grief (yet!).

-- 
Jonathan Arnold           Software Engineer
inSORS Integrated Communications, Inc
jarnold_at_insors.com Office/fax: 781.391.2818