On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Jerome Vuarand <[email protected]> wrote: > That on the other hand would go against the idea I exposed above, > since AFAIK MinGW doesn't have support for delay-loaded DLLs yet.
Yes, it's a useful thing to have because it makes everything more flexible. > That's a bit off-topic, but wouldn't that be more friendly to the user > to let him choose the toolchain, and thus provide support for several > ones ? The dependency on VC8 is something that has prevented me from > using LuaRocks on Windows. Well, it will use whatever cl.exe is on the path. There is an issue because LR is not making fine distinctions between incompatible binaries on Windows, so it will merrily go and get the 'Win32-x86' binary unless told not to. As it stands, LfW is an awkward place, because the compiler it uses is becoming ancient history fast. mingw is the way to go for LfW, but obviously that should not prevent LR from being able to build for any given MS compiler. steve d. _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers
