Re: [AD] Allegro 4.2.0

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]


On Thursday 10 November 2005 20:30, Matthew Leverton wrote:
> It has Windows "binaries" for:
> 
> Compiler: MSVC 6/7.0/7.1/8.0, MinGW, Borland
> Documentation: CHM / HTML / RTF / Text
> Tools & Examples ("misc" package)
> 
> I don't know where the Tools & Examples fits in on SF - whether it
> should be in its own thing, in the Binary section, or no where.
> 
> Each of the binaries is available as a zip, 7z, or exe (self
> extracting 7z), but they don't all have to go on SF if it's too messy.
> If only one is picked, probably the Zip would be the best version,
> although the 7z's are much smaller.

Last I heard, SF doesn't care about diskspace and zip is probably the more 
common format.
I've uploaded the ZIP archives for MinGW and MSVC to SourceForge.
This reminds me: should update the allegro-dlls package as well or can we 
say this supercedes them? In my mind, they serve a slightly different 
purpose: the binary packages for compilers are for developers who don't 
want to build from sources, the DLL package is for people who just want to 
update their DLLs.

By the way, did I ever complain what a pain it is that the FRS doesn't 
allow you to change the properties of more than one file at a time?

Evert




Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+ http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/