MSVC Portability

John Bailey rekkanoryo at
Fri Apr 5 23:27:46 EDT 2013

On 04/05/2013 04:43 PM, Zoltán Sólyom wrote:
> I take back what I said previously. Making libpurple work with Visual Studio is
> getting more and more troublesome. Another access violation, now in fprintf,
> when libpurple tries to write a log file. It is the same problem, some
> components use a different runtime, so I would have to recompile another bunch
> of DLLs. First I thought it's only libintl, which has the fprintf definitions,
> but it calls into gettext, and also uses libiconv. I tried but can't get them to
> compile with Visual Studio unfortunately, so I have to give up using it. So even
> if libpurple itself compiles and would work, there are many DLLs there which
> won't. (Unless someone compiles most of the accompanying DLLs in the future.)

Have you looked into how Instantbird handles compiling libpurple, glib, libxml,
etc.?  Someone involved with that project already pointed out that they compile
libpurple and friends using Visual Studio 2010, although they do go the route of
having everything compiled into a single DLL.  Considering Instantbird's
success, I would definitely suggest following their path for building libpurple
and its dependencies.  Who knows, maybe you could even end up finding ways to
improve the situation for both your planned application and Instantbird.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the Devel mailing list