>>> How about something like this.. A VC-WIN32-XP target that has
>>> everything needed to make a max compatibility target
>>> When building under VS2012 and above.. (I also tested in VS2015)
>>> adds CFLAGS  /arch:IA32 -D_USING_V110_SDK71_
>>> adds BIN_LDFLAGS=/subsystem:console,5.01 /opt:ref
>>
>> How about
>>
>> set CL=/arch:ia32
>> set LINK=/subsysten:console,5.00
>>
>> Why this is inappropriate? Have another compiler version? Just adjust
>> appropriately. Microsoft changes something? Just adjust appropriately.
>> You *are* in control.
> 
> It's not inappropriate at all. I just wanted to help people that may
> want that compatibility and don't know what flags to use.

Here is dilemma. To help people you have to convey the information. In
*either* case, right? But which words to choose? Ones telling how to
take control over situation in arbitrary case, or suggest
version-specifc config they might have to adjust anyway?

At any occasion I also want to point out/remind that contributes configs
are meant to go separate files in Configurations catalog.

-- 
openssl-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev

Reply via email to