Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/02/10/01:29:47
> I also know that build-depends is a real headache for Red Hat package
> maintainers so I'm not in a hurry to foist that extra bookkeeping
> headache on cygwin maintainers. It's moderate effort for small
> gain given that there are other more important things that could
> be done with and to setup.exe.
>
> However, if you are building the whole package, then why not just
> download... the whole package?
well, I need to know which ones to *build* first, and which order
to build them.. Like I said I want to do it with as few deps as possible,
if possible just g++ and make, and shell.
As for the reason *why* I'm doing this from scratch, well, it gives
me freedom to encorporate packages that aren't technically 'cygwin'
packages, host patches that may or may not become part of a standard
distributions, and build - or attempt to build - via other compilers
and linkers.
> >I'm assuming that these correspond to the -src.tar.bz2 pcakages inside
> >of the repository, and each one of these has . However there are
> >makefiles which coordinate the build, above these directories (at level
> >winsup). I'm assuming that these aren't part of any package that is
> >distributed. I could be wrong.
>
> Could be, and are. There is no need to speculate when simple inspection
> of the source tarballs and of the CVS repository would show you how
> things are laid out. There is no need to assume that things are broken
> rather than working.
ok, I misread. 'cygrunsrv' for cygsrv, assumed 'cygwin' == cygwin, mingw-runtime
== mingw, etc. In order to do a 'simple inspection' I would need to download
these all. I thought it'd be simpler to ask.
anyways, I'll plow through it and see what happens.
Ed
--
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 -