![]() dlls from a "source" folder (in source control) into my output folder. So I will usually create a custom build step that copies the required. I like to think of the debug folder as something I can blow away and rebuild at any time, and I like to have a one-step build process that puts everything where it needs to be so I can easily build on any machine. I don't like manually putting files in my debug or release folders. The specific rules for how Windows searches for a. exe is the safest, because generally you have control of that folder. Actually none of those locations are recommended! Putting them in the same folder as the. dll at run-time, so you could put the dlls in the current directory, a system directory (definitely not recommended), or another directory in your PATH environment variable. Or you might need to put different versions of the DLL into each one of those two folders. Therefore it might go in System32 or in SysWOW64. Windows will search several folders when looking for a. With 64-bit Windows, it depends whether the DLL in question is written for 32-bit or 64-bit execution. ![]() exe, though that normally makes the most sense. The dlls do not have to be in the same folder as the. exe larger, but means you may be able to distribute a single file. lib files at link-time rather than linking to the. To avoid having a bunch of dlls that have to exist with your application, you could use static linking. Your application needs these libraries, so putting them in the same folder allows it to find them. There's nothing wrong with this approach, and it's probably the quickest way to get your application up and running.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |