From: Fay J. F C. AAC/W. <joh...@eg...> - 2003-10-21 12:36:19
|
The short answer is yes. That's why I really like the "FREEGLUT_STATIC" option. John F. Fay joh...@eg... -----Original Message----- From: Braden McDaniel [mailto:br...@en...] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 5:03 PM To: fre...@li... Subject: RE: [Freeglut-developer] Building from CVS under Cygwin Quoting Norman Vine <nh...@ca...>: > Braden McDaniel writes: > > > > > How about MS-WINDOWS users? Don't installed DLLs all go into something > > > like :\WINDOWS\LIBS or some such? > > > > They can go anywhere. "System" DLLs typically go in > > "C:\WINDOWS\System32"; though it's common for apps to put DLLs they need > > in their directory under "C:\Program Files". As it stands, neither glut > > nor freeglut is a system fixture on Windows; so each of them can reside > > anywhere. > > Which means each app will have to have it's own private copy of the > glut dll in the same directory as the executable inorder to be robust. > > UGHHH !!! > > Might as well go back to staticly linking everything :-( I'd expect that to be what most Win32 glut apps do now. Is it not? -- Braden McDaniel e-mail: <br...@en...> <http://endoframe.com> Jabber: <br...@ja...> ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by OSDN developer relations Here's your chance to show off your extensive product knowledge We want to know what you know. Tell us and you have a chance to win $100 http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?HRPT1X3RYQNC5V4MLNSV3E54 _______________________________________________ Freeglut-developer mailing list Fre...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freeglut-developer |