httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gregg L. Smith" <>
Subject Re: Discuss: Dropping dsw/dsp files
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:32:00 GMT
On 1/20/2012 12:14 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 1/20/2012 2:06 PM, Gregg L. Smith wrote:
>> Due to the fact that right now, you have to convert to VC9 first, then convert to
VC10, I
>> have some insight here that I am sure you do as well.
> Good point...
>> If you have done this, you may remember how long that last conversion takes to accomplish.
>> I can convert in VC9 from dsw/dsp in under a minute. The last time I tried converting
>> to VC10 it took a long, long time. Minutes, many minutes.
>> I would have to assume converting up from VC7 would be same on VC9 as converting
9 to 10.
>> Even if not, from 7 to 10 would again, be a slow process.
> That is troublesome.  However, it only affects GUI interaction?  It should
> not impact .mak based builds.

True, but there are reasons I prefer the GUI, biggest is where one runs 
into trouble during a compile. I can rebuild any specific problem 
project/s, remove buildbin dependency from the installbin project, and 
when I have hammered out the specific problems, use said installbin to 
just copy the files into place.

Good example is recent APR-Util 1.4.1 and the static lib not compiling 
w/ crypto. I was able to compile all but the few things linked to the 
static lib, remove the crypto switch in apu.hw, then built the static 
lib and the things like ab and abs that linked to it, none needed 
apr_crypto anyway. Not such an easy task to do via makefile.

New people to the game also prefer the GUI, after all, why do we have 
Windows (ok, KDE. XServer, Gnome, same in the *nix world these days)?

>> This was my technical reason behind my request to keep the dsw/dsp files while also
>> supplying VC10 sln/vcproj as well. This way, all are covered, and no one has to wait
>> long time for the conversion. Sure, many are EOL but none the less still in use.
> Will consider this.  Or provide a much more efficient transition.

Thanks, I see Steffen has spoken up on this on the other thread as well.



View raw message