Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "debuginformationformat".
2016 Sep 09
2
[PATCH 1/3] appveyor: include opus.dll and opus.exp files if available
Using -i should prevent failing if the files don't exist.
---
appveyor.yml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/appveyor.yml b/appveyor.yml
index c85b0b1..ad9c6c0 100644
--- a/appveyor.yml
+++ b/appveyor.yml
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ build:
verbosity: minimal
after_build:
-- cmd: 7z a opus.zip win32\VS2015\%PLATFORM%\%CONFIGURATION%\opus.lib include\*.h
+- cmd: 7z
2016 Jul 15
3
[PATCH 1/4] Create a simple project to create version.h to run before any other
Avoids trying to create and replace version.h more than once which
led to file-locking errors with multicore builds.
---
Makefile.am | 1 +
win32/VS2015/celt.vcxproj | 48 +++++++++++++++++---------
win32/VS2015/generate_version.vcxproj | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
win32/VS2015/opus.sln | 32 ++++++++++++++++-
2004 Dec 03
2
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Updated LLVM Visual Studio project files]
...ks="3"
> RuntimeLibrary="3"
> ForceConformanceInForLoopScope="TRUE"
> RuntimeTypeInfo="TRUE"
> UsePrecompiledHeader="0"
> WarningLevel="3"
> Detect64BitPortabilityProblems="TRUE"
> DebugInformationFormat="4"
> DisableSpecificWarnings="4800;4244;4267"/>
> <Tool
> Name="VCCustomBuildTool"/>
> <Tool
> Name="VCLibrarianTool"
> OutputFile="$(OutDir)/x86.lib"/>
> <Tool
> Name="VCM...
2004 Dec 03
0
[LLVMdev] [Fwd: Updated LLVM Visual Studio project files]
...imeLibrary="3"
> > ForceConformanceInForLoopScope="TRUE"
> > RuntimeTypeInfo="TRUE"
> > UsePrecompiledHeader="0"
> > WarningLevel="3"
> > Detect64BitPortabilityProblems="TRUE"
> > DebugInformationFormat="4"
> > DisableSpecificWarnings="4800;4244;4267"/>
> > <Tool
> > Name="VCCustomBuildTool"/>
> > <Tool
> > Name="VCLibrarianTool"
> > OutputFile="$(OutDir)/System.lib"/>
> &g...
2008 May 21
3
[LLVMdev] 2.3 Pre-release available for testing
Razvan Aciu wrote:
> As I saw from the mailing list the MSVC 2005 patches were made to take into
> account the new files from the development branch, files which are not in
> the 2.3 release. So for now the below patch is the only one functional for
> the release. If I am wrong, please someone correct me.
>
> If someone can make a 2005 patch for the release branch, it is ok.