httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gregg L. Smith" <...@gknw.net>
Subject Re: Re: Windows Laundry List
Date Wed, 18 May 2011 00:18:06 GMT
Ugh, me again, forgot to leave my say on this.

Call me whatever, I prefer the IDE for a few reasons;

It's simpler to rebuild one project if need be, faster too.
It helps delay the onset of Carpal Tunnel.

Maybe not great reasons, but frankly it's easier for noobs too. However you do it, please
keep them. Since I see no make files but a few, what are your plans there?

I personally like dsp/dsw's since they are much easier to read and edit even though I have
pretty much retired my VC6. I have used it to export makefiles for 2.3 back a few versions.
I build vc9 so conversion is no problem. That's all I'll say on that subject ;-)

Gregg

-----Original Message-----
From: "William A. Rowe Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:19:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Windows Laundry List

We may have reached the fork in the road where it no longer makes sense
to maintain both a gui dsp/vcproj and makefiles from the studio solution.
VC 7/2002 dropped support for exporting makefiles; VC 10 drops support
for converting dsp/dsw into vcproj files.  So if we want either dsp/dsw
or vcproj/sln files, we may be at the point of adopting the subversion
approach to generating these gui representations from makefiles or
resources common to the unix build, as the apr project generates from
the .



Mime
View raw message