Steve has, as usual, hit the nail on the head. There will probably be a dozen variations on the operating system and maintaining them would be a great increase in the workload. And an application programmer who needs "freeglut" will have a compiler, while an end user who doesn't have a compiler should get a "freeglut" binary with his application distribution. So the question of "sources and the means to build them" is answered by the MSVC workspace and project files.
John F. Fay
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Steve Baker
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Freeglut-developer] Windows Libraries With Distribution? (was RE: [Freeglut-developer ] Bug Report [ 1094940 ] Project files probably out-of-sync)
Mike A. Harris wrote:
> If supplying anything prebuilt for Windows users, please make separate
> binary tarballs for this, rather than including prebuilt binaries in
> the source code distribution tarballs.
Getting into the binary distribution business is VERY tricky. Will
you need different versions for various OS's? Different compilers?
If this project is run by a Linux user, who will guarantee to be
here to build the various Windows binaries promptly for ever new
I'm not saying we shouldn't do this - but it's always been my view
that a source distribution should contain *JUST* the sources and
the means to build them.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------