| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> writes: > Build environments to recreate a -src package need > a) pristine source TARBALL. > b) patch for current -x version > c) extracted and patched working dir. > the pre-patch -src requirement has been. See > http://www.cygwin.com/setup.html. No mention of a prepatched source > tarball is made at all. Ah, ok. I'm just used to those, as I'm rebuilding from available patched -src packages if possible. Do we already have -src packages that adhere to this new convention? If it's not too late, it would be very nice if they could be distinguished from the old, prepatched -src packages, by using a different naming convention, ie foo-1.1-cyg.tar.gz? > > mv foo-1.1 foo-1.1-1 > > Not sure why you're bothering to rename this. My bad, I was thinking of tarring up the patched src tarball. > do porting. So the point is that if RPM had been contributed, and you > maintain *just that one package* as an official package Ok, but I had conflicting interest: I needed all packages now to provide lilypond, and couldn't maintain them all for cygwin. Also, I assumed, had an rpm or other port caught on, the mirroring at cygnus would have worked. > That hasn't changed - mingw doesn't aim for posix support. Ok. > BTW: can you freshed up your postremove patch? I'd like that to be > included in setup. Yes, will do. Greetings, Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke AT gnu DOT org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |