Ok. What do you think about having the client service default to installing both--separately, but transparently , when a library is installed?
That would be a configurable setting. Garrett Serack | Open Source Software Developer | Microsoft Corporation I don't make the software you use; I make the software you use better on Windows. -----Original Message----- From: coapp-developers-bounces+garretts=microsoft....@lists.launchpad.net [mailto:coapp-developers-bounces+garretts=microsoft....@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of William A. Rowe Jr. Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 8:38 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Coapp-developers] Bundling x64 and x86 binaries in the same library package? On 4/16/2010 9:59 AM, Garrett Serack wrote: > For Library packages (static and dynamic) I’m wondering if we > shouldn’t just put both variants in the same package—still installing > the WinSxS binaries appropriately, and putting the .lib files in the correct > spot. > > This would actually conserve disk-space, since the x64 and x86 > versions of the packages could share include & doc directories, and we > could use symlinks for that. Don't go there. This is the source of most OS/X pain; the fact that Apple has stacked the single unified binaries. Many open source include files simply don't and can't cope with this, and many patches that would enable this on OS/X are rejected out of hand because the model is broken with respect to particular open source projects :) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~coapp-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
