Windows: Patching can become problematic (when using static linkage) if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using static linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our program runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
Show differencesHistory of post edits
#5brx
Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:41 PM
Windows: Patching can become problematic (when using static linkage) if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using static linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using static linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
#4brx
Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:40 PM
Windows: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
#3brx
Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:40 PM
Windows: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
Linux: Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Besides: Our company (not me!) says: We support Linux! This is about the same as for a mobile app developer to say "we support android" Too many different vendors... if nothing changes there will never be a (binary distributed) program that runs on all Linux distributions. But, I can assure you, our programs runs on all PCs that run Windows 2000 (yes, really) or later.
#2brx
Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:35 PM
Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
Patching can become problematic (when using staic linkage) if you switch to a newer gcc version and run an incremental update.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!
#1brx
Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:34 PM
Patching can become problematic if you switch to a newer VS version and run an incremental update.
Patching can become problematic if you switch to a newer gcc version.
I'm starting to have the feeling that the last posts are just due to some "M$ is teh evil" (sorry, English isn't my first language) troll and we should leave it at that. So, to the OP, don't worry about those entries, it's all good!