- Online Community Forums » Allegro Development » Allegro 5.1.13 released!

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
 1   2 
Allegro 5.1.13 released!
Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007

Neil Roy said:

Wow, that was fast, many thanks for your efforts, they are appreciated.

You're welcome. With my new laptop, 4 cores and a SSD, it makes it child's play to rebuild allegro now. Whereas it took hours before.

Neil Roy said:

Seems to work fine. I statically compiled/linked everything, done a clean rebuid and tried my best to hide all the DLLs from my paths and it still seems to run fine even though those two dlls "libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll" and "libstdc++-6.dll" do not APPEAR to be in the path anywhere. Does it still require them when statically linked? Or perhaps do I have them in my path somewhere I do not know. I would rather not have to include the, but if I have to I will, not a big deal really. Also, just to clarify, "OpenAL.dll" is no longer needed? I statically link everything, even my debug versions. Using the compiler you zipped as well as your binaries (best idea ever by the way!).

You should only need libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll and libstdc++-6.dll when you build using the dynamic libraries. I should have eliminated the CRT from the static builds. And I got rid of the dependency on OpenAL in both builds.

And as a commentary, MinGW-Get is a nightmare, doesn't provide the latest versions of gcc, and won't even minimize when it's updating your packages. Dumbest idea ever.

Member #2,229
April 2002

You should only need libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll and libstdc++-6.dll when you build using the dynamic libraries.

Awesome. So far that seems to be testing out okay.

Rodolfo Lam
Member #16,045
August 2015

At first I was reluctant to use the NuGet version for VS... So many years accustomed to the normal drill of setting dependencies, include and library directories, Linker input files. However, I have to admit this is just brilliant! Everything just works and the installation is super easy. This is totally the way to go for Allegro. The easy installation should increase the user base on the long term

Bruce Pascoe
Member #15,931
April 2015

Indeed, NuGet is very nice. I used to be the same way, managing include paths, libraries, etc. manually (and meticulously, due to... programmer OCD issues), but what finally converted me was using version control (Git). Keeping opaque third-party binaries directly in my Git repo means it increases in size every time you modify the file, so NuGet was a breath of fresh air.

One thing I don't like is that Visual Studio doesn't put NuGet in the PATH, even when you use the Developer Command Prompt, making it difficult to automate restoring dependencies for a fresh source tree.

Another great thing about the Allegro packages in particular is they add an Allegro page to your project settings, allowing you to change add-ons, static/dynamic, etc. on the fly. This is a great convenience that was very tedious to manage when Allegro only provided loose binaries.

 1   2 

Go to: