stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Anton Pevtsov" <Ant...@moscow.vdiweb.com>
Subject RE: copying .dll to project directories (was Re: [Fwd: Solution generartion script for Intel 9.0 compiler])
Date Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:13:20 GMT
Martin Sebor wrote:
> If appending $BUILDDIR/lib to PATH is too difficult to do in the IDE I
would prefer to require users to set it on the command line before   >
invoking Visual Studio rather than do the copying. But I recognize that
others may feel differently :) How about making the copying an     >
option (say, /COPYDLL) to the generate script?

OK, I'll add the option. But this will require additional changes in the
scripts (include examples running scripts) and I prefer to do it after
we will get the stable working version for Intel C++ compiler. Maybe it
will be useful to create an jira note for this issue (just to remember
about it)?

With best wishes,
Anton Pevtsov


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 22:25
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: copying .dll to project directories (was Re: [Fwd: Solution
generartion script for Intel 9.0 compiler])


Anton Pevtsov wrote:
[...]
> Martin Sebor wrote:
> 
>>Also, if we are still copying the .dll to the example and test 
>>directories as I noticed the script was some time back I would like to
> 
> 
>>change this to make sure no such copying takes place. Instead > we 
>>should modify the PATH variable or do whatever else is normally done 
>>within the IDE to get this to work.
> 
> 
> As far as I know IDE does the same. And it cannot run .exe file if the
> required .dll is absent in the current directory and in the PATH's 
> directories. Could you please explain why you don't like the copiyng? 
> This is the post-build step and it is executed automatically when you 
> build the project (from IDE or via build.bat).

I don't like copying the .dll (or any duplication in general) because it
increases the chances of things getting out of sync when the user
rebuilds the library some other way other than through the IDE (e.g.,
via a makefile). They'll have to remember to copy it to all the right
places.

If appending $BUILDDIR/lib to PATH is too difficult to do in the IDE I
would prefer to require users to set it on the command line before
invoking Visual Studio rather than do the copying. But I recognize that
others may feel differently :) How about making the copying an option
(say, /COPYDLL) to the generate script?

Martin

Mime
View raw message