-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jim.Hyslop wrote:
>Derek Robert Price wrote:
>
>>Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 11:43 PM
>>To: Conrad T. Pino
>>
>>>I only have Visual C++ 6.0 and various Borland C/C++ compilers.
>>>How much flexibility do we have deviating away from Visual C++ 5?
>>
>>
>>Well, fact of the matter is, I only have VC++ 6.0 too, so
>>unless someone
>>who has VC++ 5.0 wants to help out, we'll have to drop
>>support for VC++ 5.0.
>
>I could probably dig up a copy of VC 5.0, but is it worth it? What's the
>reason behind using VC5 as the officially supported version?
As far as I know, not much aside from that's the way it's always been,
but we do have a volunteer now who has offered to set up nightly build
testing on Windows using VC++ 5.0, so without an overriding reason to
bump it up, we might as well continue to support VC++ 5.0.
Derek
- --
*8^)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Netscape - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAMpaJLD1OTBfyMaQRAl8cAJwJrbkSIqZz9gXEzAeaRXvkea+ONQCffqQM
hA2nFekWS3YKoNVLZOjGnjk=
=hZ3Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
