Re: Kept support of Visual Studio 2005

[Graham Bloice <graham.bloice () trihedral com>]

On 20 May 2013 17:54, Gerald Combs <gerald () wireshark org> wrote:

> On 5/20/13 8:37 AM, Graham Bloice wrote:
> > This is the small end of a long and wriggly worm.
> >
> > Windows builds can consume system libraries from two sources, the
> > Compiler\VS Studio installation and the Platform SDK.  Merely checking
> > the compiler version isn't necessarily the correct option as the build
> > may be using a much newer version of the SDK that doesn't have the
> > issue.  In addition the build may be targeted at version of Windows that
> > doesn't suffer the issue.  I would like to have the time to sort this
> out.
>
> Would reducing the number of supported compilers in config.nmake help in
> that regard?

It would be a start.

> > In general though, I agree that for Windows, supporting old compilers
> > isn't really necessary as Visual Studio will generally install on older
> > OS's, excepting that VS2012 limits support to Win7 and later, so we
> > might need to support VS2010 for XP and Vista, although even XP dies
> > (from mainstream support) in Apr 2014.
>
> I'm OK with removing VS 2005 and .Net Framework 2.0.
Personally I'd cut VS 2008 off as well.  Supporting the current and
previous version should be OK, especially as VS isn't distributed as part
of the OS so isn't tied to it and the Express editions are just a download
away, and all versions can co-exist happily on the same machine I think
(definitely true for VS2005 & 2012, so probably true for other versions).

Graham

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe