>>> 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