Randall Becker <randall.becker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > What I actually proposed was splitting --build-options with > runtime (some representative argument). This would allow the > headers used at build time (--build-options) to be reported *and* > the runtime (probably) DLL versions (but would also report static > linked library versions) to be reported. Both are useful from a > support standpoint. That certainly is a reasonable future plan. > However, the --build-options argument was > intended to report an invariant set of values used during the > build, so I would rather not conflate the two distinctly different > semantic values. This reasoning makes sense to me, too. Please wrap overly long lines to reasonable width, by the way.
