Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update for Visual Studio solutions #27

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update for Visual Studio solutions #27

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

Zuzu-Typ
Copy link

@Zuzu-Typ Zuzu-Typ commented Aug 13, 2017

This pull request includes the following changes:

  • removed old VS2005, VS2008 and VS2010 solutions (because they are no longer present in libogg anyway)
  • added VS2015 solution
  • added include path for "..\ ..\ ..\ogg", if you're using libogg as a GitHub clone
  • merged vorbis_dynamic.sln and vorbis_static.sln to vorbis.sln (instead it uses Debug and Release for static and DebugDLL and ReleaseDLL for dynamic, which is how it's done in opus)
  • using libogg.lib instead of libogg_static.lib when building dynamically, so someone who built libogg dynamically doesn't have to waste time and disk space building libogg statically.

Note#1: Merging this only makes sense if xiph/ogg#29 is merged too, because the new solution searches for libogg in e.g. DebugDLL

Note#2: The platform toolset of VS2015 is still v120, because I do not have Visual Studio 2015 on hand, so you might want to upgrade it to v140

I think this is everything I changed.

@tdaede
Copy link
Contributor

tdaede commented Jan 28, 2019

Really old pr... but this needs to pass appveyor first.

@Zuzu-Typ
Copy link
Author

Zuzu-Typ commented Feb 4, 2019

Considering the nature of this PR, it's obvious it will never pass appveyor until the tests are adjusted.

Remember, the changes I made are supposed to make it easier to build ogg and vorbis by using the same approach as it's done in opus.

Please read the description at the top - it shouldn't be all that difficult to understand.

@tdaede
Copy link
Contributor

tdaede commented Feb 4, 2019

Right, the appveyor.yml configuration is in the repo so you should be able to match it to the new solutions in this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants