I'm with Geir on his comments, but evaluating MSVC I think is a good idea because there are so many folks who use it-- or is it? Rodrigo' comments about confusion with multiple compiler support make a compelling argument about going with _one_ compiler-- and look at the minor diffs we have already experienced! Rodrigo needs '__int64' on hit Linux box, and Robin is arguing with finding the correct 'thread.h' (apparently), and I had no problems. All of us are using GCC. What does this tell us? The less we deal with mechanical issues like compiler invocations, the more real work we get done.
Bottom line: Should we just declare one compiler for now and branch out later, once we have all of our porting done? Next observation: There has been an offer of help with 'autotools' and some concern about that tool. I've seen GNU autoconf work (part of autotools?) nicely, and I'm interested in exploring this avenue further. Dan Lydick -----Original Message----- From: Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Oct 21, 2005 10:31 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Small problems building under cygwin I believe Express versions are available for download - http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/visualc/default.aspx -- dims On 10/21/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd like to be sure that we don't have a barrier to entry by having > to go get commercial software to build the project - by this I mean > a MSVC requirement. I'm happy if windows users can use MSVC if they > want - i.e. if someone supports it - but it can't be the only option. > > geir > ...snip... Dan Lydick
