X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<47F6D7D7.3010009@cygwin.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:37:27 -0400
From:	"Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070505 Remi/2.0.0.0-3.fc4.remi Lightning/0.8 Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: gettext latest vers. 0.17
References:	<20080405095403 DOT 2168 AT blackhawk>
In-Reply-To:	<20080405095403.2168@blackhawk>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

wynfield AT gmail DOT com wrote:
> Just as the person below noted that the latest version of gettext, 0.17
> was needed, I found myself also needing it. I expect that more and more
> newer versions and updates will be requiring it.
> 
> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2008-03/msg00220.html
> 
> The current cygwin gettext package is over two years old. The below
> cygwin
> archive gives an explanation for this.
> 
> http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2008-02/msg00359.html
> 
> My question is the usage of "cygport" really required to be used. I
> certainly feel that it should not be required and it has certainly appeared
> to hamper a lot of progress in maintenance and updates of existing packages.
> 
> It is a tool, best know by its developer, but it is merely a tool and
> should not be a required one. Cygwin already has a specification for
> packages, the only requirement should be that a package meets that
> specification, not how it was accomplished.
> 
> It would be great to allow that freedom and then we can get a latest
> update of gettext and all would be happy.
> 
> This is my understanding. Please comment on the "required use" of
> cygport.   And who said it is required and why.

The short answer is that usage of cygport is not required.  The slightly
longer answer is that use of cygport has been encouraged but not mandated.
A quick look at the Cygwin Package Contributor's Guide should prove quite
illuminating in this regard <http://cygwin.com/setup.html>.  It doesn't
even mention cygport as an option, which is an oversight for sure, but
should alleviate any concern that cygport is a requirement.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
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 -