List Info

Thread: win32 binary build, committed to VC6 for life of 2.2.x?
win32 binary build, committed to VC6 for life of 2.2.x?
user name
 2007-10-16 12:34:03 
Will the transition to a new MS compiler necessarily be on a
major
release boundary? Or is this really on the table at any
given time
based on the binaries being more or less a convenience?

wrt third-party modules, it seems like we will have to
eventually pull
the trigger and lead (force) the upgrade.


-- 
Eric Covener
covenergmail.com
Re: win32 binary build, committed to VC6 for life of 2.2.x?
country flaguser name
United States		 2007-10-16 12:57:25 
Eric Covener wrote:
> Will the transition to a new MS compiler necessarily be
on a major
> release boundary? Or is this really on the table at any
given time
> based on the binaries being more or less a
convenience?
> 
> wrt third-party modules, it seems like we will have to
eventually pull
> the trigger and lead (force) the upgrade.

I envision this being httpd 2.4 - following our interest in
maintaining
binary compatibility.  A plethora of MSVCRT's out there adds
to the
complexity of following the principal for Windows.

Of course there is the issue of loading third party
binaries, and I hope
that ActiveState and others finally catch up, too.

We won't /break/ VC 6/7 builds, but our defacto binary would
likely be VC8
along the timetable of the next httpd minor or major
release.

FYI the next httpd 2.2.7 should build just fine on VC8 for
either x86 or x64.
With luck it will even compile cleaner on x64 than it does
now.  Only APR
is really thoroughly 'tested' as being ready for x64,
however.
Re: win32 binary build, committed to VC6 for life of 2.2.x?
user name
 2007-10-16 16:38:04 

  


  

    I'd like to give some input on this aswel.
Has the compatibility been tested between MSVC80 and MSVC80Free binary <-> module compilations?

I'd like to do some testing on that but my hardware doesn't allow for a vm at my dorm at the moment.


On 10/16/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. < wrowerowe-clan.net">wrowerowe-clan.net> wrote:

Eric Covener wrote:
>; Will the transition to a new MS compiler necessarily be on a major
> release boundary? Or is this really on the table at any given time
> based on the binaries being more or less a convenience?

>
&gt; wrt third-party modules, it seems like we will have to eventually pull
> the trigger and lead (force) the upgrade.

I envision this being httpd 2.4 - following our interest in maintaining
binary compatibility. &nbsp;A plethora of MSVCRT';s out there adds to the

complexity of following the principal for Windows.

Of course there is the issue of loading third party binaries, and I hope
that ActiveState and others finally catch up, too.

We won't /break/ VC 6/7 builds, but our defacto binary would likely be VC8

along the timetable of the next httpd minor or major release.

FYI the next httpd 2.2.7 should build just fine on VC8 for either x86 or x64.
With luck it will even compile cleaner on x64 than it does now.  Only APR

is really thoroughly 'tested' as being ready for x64, however.



-- 
~Jorge

  

  
  
   
     
    






 [1-3]











   
 





about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )