From: Peter Foley (pjfoley_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-12 04:57:00
"Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> On Friday 12 August 2005 02:13, Andrey Melnikov wrote:
> > For VC it isn't possible to have private installations. And if all
> > installations are global, there is no need to have private config files.
Just to clarify it is possible (but there is no way to make it private)
"Side-by-Side Installations of Visual Studio
Visual Studio supports installation of Visual Studio 6.0, Visual Studio .NET
2002, 2003, and Visual Studio 2005 on the same computer, which allows you to
evaluate the latest version of Visual Studio and upgrade gradually."
> What do you mean? I recally I've used VC install on one machine from
> one via SMB mount. The second machine had no idea that VC was ever
> and the first machine was actually running Linux. Looks like "private
I believe what your trying to say is that you used the command line tools
remotely and not the actual Visual Studio IDE.
So you could conceptually have a user config file stipulate the use of the
Visual C++ 6.5 compiler and linker.
So in effect your both correct :p.
The Site config could only configure Visual C++ 2005 (or what ever it is
called) and the user config could be setup to also use Visual C++ 6.5. So a
user could potentially use either.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk