Re: Size and dependencies of bit.dll (LuaForWindows)

[Drake Wilson <drake@...>]

Quoth "E. Toernig" <froese@gmx.de>, on 2010-09-27 21:46:46 +0200:
> If you don't want to use mingw, take the WDK - it creates DLLs and
> EXEs that link against plain msvcrt.dll.  No "Visual" gadgetry
> though and all of MS's command line tools seem to be in alpha-state.
>
> And if you really want to use VS: I think there are tutorials on how
> to create VS-apps that link against msvcrt.dll and need no redistrib-
> utables.

I'm curious how this interacts with the official platform stance
apparently being that this is a broken thing to be doing for
general-purpose applications and that you're playing with fire trying
to link against MSVCRT directly.

See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/abx4dbyh%28VS.80%29.aspx:
| What is the difference between msvcrt.dll and msvcr80.dll?
|
| The msvcrt.dll is now a "known DLL," meaning that it is a system
| component owned and built by Windows. It is intended for future use
| only by system-level components.

Or for instance:
  http://www.dotnetmonster.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/vs-net-general/1259/msvcr70-dl-msvcrt-dll
  http://stackoverflow.com/questions/190059/building-windows-c-libraries-without-a-runtime

(Yes, this does imply that MinGW linking against MSVCRT by default
seems broken to me, though not necessarily in an easily rectifiable
way.  I would tend to think that the theoretically-correct approach
would be along the lines of an extra libre CRT for Windows of some
kind, but I'm insufficiently experienced with Windows to be sure of
that.)

   ---> Drake Wilson