Derek Buitenhuis <[email protected]> writes: > On 18/06/2012 1:35 PM, Martin Storsjö wrote: >>> I'm not trying to advocate a particular position here, but here is a >>> > little bit of background on msvcrt vs versioned runtimes: >>> > >>> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/abx4dbyh(VS.71).aspx : >>> > >>> > What is the difference between msvcrt.dll and msvcr71.dll? >>> > >>> > The msvcrt.dll is now a "known DLL," meaning that it is a system >>> > component owned and built by Windows. It is intended for future use >>> > only by system-level components. An application should use and >>> > redistribute msvcr71.dll, and it should avoid placing a copy or using >>> > an existing copy of msvcr71.dll in the system directory. Instead, the >>> > application should keep a copy of msvcr71.dll in its application >>> > directory with the program executable. Any application built with >>> > Visual C++ .NET using the /MD switch will necessarily use msvcr71.dll. >> That does make sense and fits my picture on how one is supposed to do >> things on windows. The mingw default of using the plain msvcrt.dll matches >> the unix style more then, where you use whatever libc the system happens >> to have. Mingw seems to have link libraries for all those versioned >> runtimes, too, so I guess it's possible to choose the runtime to link to, >> in some way. >> >> Anyway, I guess nobody is opposed to this patch going in as is, the >> default targeted version would be a separate patch. > > Is there any problem with just using /MT
What does that do? -- Måns Rullgård [email protected] _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
