On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Vadim Chugunov via lldb-dev < lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I was referring to this: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/ > 2999226/update-for-universal-c-runtime-in-windows. Granted, it was > probably marked as non-critical, so some users may have skipped it. > > > One of the redist options is to include an MSU in your installer that > tells Windows Update to add UCRT to the list of components it updates > > We should figure out how to do that. > > But meanwhile, do people here agree that LLVM should be built with the /MD > flag? > Like Reid said above, clang should statically link the CRT. > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Adrian McCarthy <amcca...@google.com> > wrote: > >> > [UCRT] had been pushed to Vista, 7 and 8 via Windows Update >> >> I didn't think that was true in general. One of the redist options is to >> include an MSU in your installer that tells Windows Update to add UCRT to >> the list of components it updates. So some Vista, 7, and 8 users may have >> received it via Windows Update, but probably not all. >> >> That's what all the deployment articles seem to suggest (assuming I've >> understood them correctly). I suppose they may have decided to ship UCRT >> to pre-Windows 10 users anyway, but I haven't come across anything that >> says that. >> >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Vadim Chugunov <vadi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Ahh, that would make sense as well, since LLDB links against liblldb as >>>> a dll. Don't see a good solution to this short of forcing dynamic linking. >>>> liblldb has to be a dll because it needs to be visible to python as an >>>> extension module. And if it's a dll and uses static linking, then we would >>>> have to require that lldb.exe not pass file handles across the dll >>>> boundary. If that's easy then great, but I suspect it probably isn't. >>>> >>>> Honestly dynamic linking was created to solve exactly these kinds of >>>> problems. Yes there's the redist issue if on Windows < 10, but it seems >>>> like a small price to pay for something that doesn't have weird subtle >>>> bugs. And as time goes on, more and more people will be on windows 10 >>>> anyway. >>>> >>>> Does the redistributable issue present a challenge for your use case? >>>> >>> >>> There are actually two part of the MSVC runtime: the Universal C Runtime >>> (UCRT) and the compiler-specific, VCRUNTIME140. The former is widely >>> available (comes with Windows 10, and had been pushed to Vista, 7 and 8 via >>> Windows Update). The latter is tied to the compiler version and must still >>> be redistributed with programs. Ideally, LLDB would use dynamic UCRT + >>> static VCRUNTIMExx. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be a supported >>> configuration (discussion of this issue in Python bug tracker >>> <https://bugs.python.org/issue24872>). Looks like Python folks opted >>> for shipping VCRUNTIME140.DLL in their install directory. >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
