3 ms·
It's sort of ironic that today I tried to install Rust through rustup-init.exe, on Windows, and it didn't work because of its dependency on Microsoft Visual C+
by childintime 6y ago
It's sort of ironic that today I tried to install Rust through rustup-init.exe, on Windows, and it didn't work because of its dependency on Microsoft Visual C++ Build Tools 2019. Rustup keeps saying "Install the C++ build tools before proceeding", though it did install from the rustup provided link.
Developer installs continue heavily invested in dangling pointers (called paths) and other unsafe practices, C/C++ style. I find that baffling.
- steveklabnik 6y agoThe context here is that this is the only way to get link.exe; if there were any easier way to do it, we would!
- jfkebwjsbx 6y agoWhy do you need link.exe? Why don’t you use LLVM’s linker?
- steveklabnik 6y agoIt’s sort of definitional, the MSVC target uses the MSVC linker by default. Some platforms, like wasm, do use lld by default, and you can override the linker if you choose. MSVC is the default because it’s the platform default, just as the Linux targets default to glibc rather than MUSL, for example.
- jfkebwjsbx 6y agoOne can argue that using the default linker is a good choice, and that is a good argument, but I don’t see how that is definitional. Btw, wasn’t Chrome and others switching soon to LLD?
- steveklabnik 6y agoI mean “The MSVC target uses the MSVC linker so that’s why you need the MSCV linker.” Yes, they are. Not sure how that’s relevant, though.
- childintime 6y agoI think I found the reason: after installing 76MB of Build Tools (the default suggested by the MS installer) I have a "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2019\BuildTools" folder.. but no link.exe in it. So I installed the full package, 4.6GB and now it works. I guess Microsoft isn't being helpful, despite Rust being their best chance ;)