newbie - hey walter, improvement potentials for installer

[Walter Bright]

On 2/14/2012 12:50 AM, Vincent wrote:
>>> * Improvement potential #3 -- Linker executable name.
>>>
>>> The name [link.exe] conflicts with Microsoft's linker. Please name it
>>> [optlink.exe].
>
>> This is why we switched away from relying solely on environment variables, such
>> as PATH, to find the programs and set options. Instead, sc.ini is used:
>
> Hi, Walter!
> I support Alf in renaming initiative. Even if you were so smart to use sc.ini,
> other vedors are not!

It's fine if they do not, as sc.ini is designed to override any path set in the 
environment.


> I put dmd/bin in PATH where dmd.exe can be found (obvious solution), BUT
> link.exe sit at the same place!
> Despite what dmd.exe uses, MS tools will catch wrong link.exe or dmd will catch
> MS' link.exe (if you put MS tools first in PATH).
> So it's MUCH easier to rename link.exe (it's not a trademark, what a problem!),
> than spreading curses every time you get strange error from compiler.
> Situation is that MS is dominating on the market, so DM should adapt its tools
> to be most painless after you add 'em on computer.
>
> Good luck!

I am loathe to break 20+ years of working makefiles.

But there is a simple solution for your case. Create a batch file, dmd.bat, with 
the contents:

    c:\dmd\windows\bin\dmd %1 %2 %3 %4

and put it somewhere in your PATH. Then, dmd will run the correct dmd.exe 
without it being on the PATH, and it will find the correct link.exe (because of 
sc.ini). Meanwhile, if you just type link, it will find your MS-LINK.

But what most people do is have multiple .bat files, one for each compiler, to 
switcheroo the environment for the compiler they wish to use at the moment. 
After all, it isn't just link.exe. It's all the tools, the .h files, the library 
files, etc.