Hacker News Reader

Comment by dgxyz | Hacker News Reader

This is harder than what I do. Just install LTSC Visual Studio build tools from [1], then chuck this in a cmd file:

    cl yourprogram.c /link user32.lib advapi32.lib ... etc etc ...

I've built a load of utilities that do that just fine. I use vim as an editor.

The Visual Studio toolchain does have LTSC and stable releases - no one seems to know about them though. see: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/visualstudio/releases/2022... - you should use these if you are not a single developer and have to collaborate with people. Back like in the old days when we had pinned versions of the toolchain across whole company.

[1] https://download.visualstudio.microsoft.com/download/pr/5d23...

View on HN

> The Visual Studio toolchain does have LTSC and stable releases - no one seems to know about them though.

You only get access to the LTSC channel if you have a license for at least Visual Studio Professional (Community won't do it); so a lot of hobbyist programmers and students are not aware of it.

On the other hand, its existence is in my experience very well-known among people who use Visual Studio for work at some company.

You can install the LTSC toolchain without a license. Just not the IDE.

That's not correct. You don't have to give your credit card details or even be logged in but you are still required to have any Visual Studio license. For hobbyists and startups the VS Community license is enough but larger companies need a VS Professional license even for the VS Build Tools.

How strict Microsoft is with enforcement of this license is another story.

You do not need a Professional or Enterprise license to use the Visual Studio Build Tools:

> Previously, if the application you were developing was not OSS, installing VSBT was permitted only if you had a valid Visual Studio license (e.g., Visual Studio Community or higher).

From (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/updates-to-visual-stu...). For OSS, you do not even need a Community License anymore.

This does not apply if you're developing closed source:

> if you and your team need to compile and develop proprietary C++ code with Visual Studio, a Visual Studio license will still be required.

Is the fancy text editor compiling, or the toolchain?

I don’t need visual to write, read, compile, or link any code using the toolchain.

That just confirms the parent comment's point. If you're just using the build tools directly, you're fine. If need to develop "with Visual Studio" i.e. the IDE, not just the command line tools, then you need the paid license.

It's actually not. It's complicated, but they're explicitly allowing Build Tools to be used to compile open source dependencies of closed source projects that do not need the MSVC toolchain for proprietary components.

It's why the example they give in the article is a Node.js application with native open source dependencies (e.g. sqlite3).

EDIT: it's clearer when read in context of the opening paragraph:

> Visual Studio Build Tools (VSBT) can now be used for compiling open-source C++ dependencies from source without requiring a Visual Studio license, even when you are working for an enterprise on a commercial or closed-source project.

Ok that does sound a bit different.

I wish the post was clearer (though I'm not sure what that looks like). I've made the same mistake interpreting it, then had to go back and reread it a few times.

The license doesn't actually permit OSS development. Only compilation of near-unmodified third party OSS libraries.

You may not compile OSS software developed by your own organisation.

The OSS software must be unmodified, "except, and only to the extent, minor modifications are necessary so that the Open Source Dependencies can be compiled and built with the software."

https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2026-ga-d...

Using VS build tools for open source development is covered by the Community licence [0], separate from this Build Tools licence change. That license is more open than you might expect, working as an individual it even permits proprietary development for commercial purposes.

Under that usage, the Community license counts as a valid Visual Studio license for Build Tools purposes, hence the second paragraph:

> This change expands user rights to the Build Tools and does not limit the existing Visual Studio Community license provisions around Open-Source development. If you already are a developer contributing to OSS projects, you can continue to use Visual Studio and Visual Studio Build Tools together for free, just like before.

[0] https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/license-terms/vs2022-ga-c...

And a VS license isn't too expensive if you really want to buy one. Stack Social have legit licenses discounted to $15:

https://www.stacksocial.com/sales/microsoft-visual-studio-pr...

This definetly looks like some sort of scam. Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such.

> Like a volume key license being resold against EULA or some such.

At least in the EU, this is legal.

Through which means?

I can only provide articles that are in German:

An article about court decision by the EuGH from 2012:

https://www.heise.de/hintergrund/EuGH-Gebrauchte-Softwareliz...

Another court decision from the BGH (the highest German civil court) from 2014 that builds on this EuGH decision:

https://www.heise.de/news/BGH-begruendet-Rechtmaessigkeit-de...

The Visual Studio Build Tools are installable with winget (`winget search buildtools`).

There are licensing constraints, IANL but essentially you need a pro+ license on the account if you're going to use it to build commercial software or in a business environment.

I worked with VC++ 6.0 up until Windows 11 when it really, really wouldn't run any more, then switched to VS 2008. The code is portable across multiple systems so it didn't really matter which version of VS it's developed with, and VC++ 6.0 would load, build the project, and have it ready to run while VS 2022 was still struggling through its startup process.

VS 2008 is starting to show the elephantine... no, continental land-mass bloat that VS is currently at, and has a number of annoying bugs, but it's still vastly better than anything after about VS 2012. And the cool thing is that MS can't fuck with it any more. When I fire up VS tomorrow it'll be the exact same VS I used today, not with half a dozen features broken, moved around, gone without a trace, ...

Yeah recent VS is awful. I recently tried VS2022. What a mess.

VS2026 is even worse. And if you thought the CoPilot enshittification in 2022 was bad, wait'll you see 2026. We only use it for final builds now, so develop under a bloated but at least not enshittified yet version, then do release builds and testing with whatever the latest version is before shipping.

I noticed Visual Studio 2026 doesn't have an LTSC release yet. Any idea when that will come out?

They've completely reworked release plans. 2026 LTSC will come out a year after the initial VS 2026 release (at the same time as VS 2027) and be supported for 1 more year. You pretty much have to get on the rolling updates train for the IDE, which is why the C++ toolchain now follows a different schedule and you're supposed to be able to install any specific toolchain side by side.

So in this new Microsoft world, “long term” means “one or two years, depending on how you count”? Ohhkay.

No, LTCS means the version after the end of public beta.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com