On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 17:33, Robert Story wrote: > On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:42:26 -0500 Alex wrote: > AB> Another option is to compile 2 (or 4 if SSL) ways and include them all > AB> in the binary installer. The user can then pick what support they want > AB> during installation. That would of course make the .exe 2 or 4 times > AB> larger so it would go from 4 Meg to either 8 Meg or 16 Meg. > > Uggh. How about a mini-installer that asks which they want, then downloads the > appropriate file? (lots of installers are doing that these days).
Yes - and it's a right bloody pain to those of us on dialup! (or wanting to automate the installation of software) Whatever we do, can we *please* keep things self-contained. I'll re-iterate the basic principle that (IMO) should underly any binary distributions. The contents and configuration of such a binary package should match the results of a default build on a "typical" installation of that particular O/S. So if a standard XP installation includes IPv6 support, then it's fine to include this in the binary package. If not, then it shouldn't go in by default. Similarly for SSL. I quite like the idea of an "unsupported" directory for non-standard binaries, though I'm not sure how cleanly this would fit into the SourceForge template pages. But we could handle it within the Net-SNMP pages easily enough. Dave ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list Net-snmp-coders@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
