Re: Distribute custom modified MFC DLL as "private assembly"?
I guess it depends. Static linking sure removes many installation problems
(especially since we got all the manifest stuff), but it also means that the
code may be loaded more than once. MFC is so small that I am sure it is not
a big deal to statically link it. Unless you are using the feature pack, of
course, because then it gets quite large.
Tom
"Phil-K" <PhilK@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3A5D1C7D-BA5F-4923-B3D4-E7EB6513095E@microsoft.com...
"Tom Serface" wrote:
I think it is "OK", but from what I've heard highly
unrecommended since they could change MFC interfaces
at any time. Of course, if you statically linked
then...
Tom
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your thoughts.
I got the impression from the following thread in
this group (2008-12, see link below) that static linking
of MFC was the prefered first choice given its
simplicity of deployment.
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.aspx?dg=microsoft.public.vc.mfc&tid=b1594081-ad35-4c5a-9ad5-34b97c7eb1e8&cat=en_US_f0847235-3112-4b9a-8717-b82f7898eeea&lang=en&cr=US&sloc=en-us&m=1&p=1
I realize the output EXE or DLL file sizes are big,
but are a lot of people leaning toward static linking
of MFC these days?
Thanks,
Phil
"Phil-K" <PhilK@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:96C08FE2-60E3-4E3A-B34A-8B5430BDB32A@microsoft.com...
(I couldn't find any documentation about this. Please point me at it,
if
there is something about this specific issue of rebuilding and
distributing a
modified MFC DLL).
Apparently VS2008 SP1 includes the source to the MFC "Feature Pack" and
a
lot of the rest of MFC's implementation. Is it OK to make
modifications
to
that source, rebuild my own custom MFC DLL and ship that DLL with my
EXE
as a
"private assembly" that only my app consumes?
I guess the problem goes away if I statically link to MFC. That is, I
could
modify the MFC sources and that modified MFC would only get statically
linked
to my EXE or DLL alone.
Thanks,
Phil