Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning:	eos.vss.fsi.com: ford owned process doing -bs
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2003 14:33:09 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Brian Ford <ford AT vss DOT fsi DOT com>
X-X-Sender:	ford AT eos
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	development under 1.5.0 ?s
Message-ID:	<Pine.GSO.4.56.0307101415530.1846@eos>
MIME-Version:	1.0

Could Corinna, or someone else knowledgeable, help me clear up some
issues with respect to development under 1.5.0?  If I should just
wait for the (forth coming?) posting to cygwin-apps, just say so.
Thanks.

Is it true that I should not recompile anything under 1.5.0 unless
all the dlls it uses have been recompiled first under same?  If not all,
how do I identify the subset?

So, 1.5.0 headers are not safe for development, except for dll package
maintainers recompiling for the above purpose, and for those carefully
checking from the bottom up?

Is it safe to use 1.3.22 headers with a 1.5.0 dll (I think so)?  Obviously
the converse is not true.

A comprehensive posting about the rules would be greatly beneficial to
those of us who develop using Cygwin.

--
Brian Ford
Senior Realtime Software Engineer
VITAL - Visual Simulation Systems
FlightSafety International
Phone: 314-551-8460
Fax:   314-551-8444

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -