Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2002/04/17/14:20:23
Currently, there are three dominant -src packaging standards.
1. As detailed on
http://cygwin.com/setup.html#package_contents
foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
foo-VER[-REL]/
foo-VER[-REL]/source files
foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs
foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs/source files
foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES
foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES/the-patch (*)
(*) already applied to the source tree. Use this to REVERT to the
"pristine" source.
2. packages which have cygwin-adapted source maintained in a
cygwin-hosted CVS repository (e.g. gcc, cygwin itself, binutils, make, a
few others).
foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
foo[-VER[-REL]]/
foo[-VER[-REL]]/source files
foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs
foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs/source files
In this scheme, there is no "cygwin patch" -- the cygwin version is
basically a fork. If you want to know how the cygwin-specific source
differs from the "official" version, you must get both sources and do
the diff yourself.
3. A method hashed out on the cygwin-apps list last november:
patches to vendor source trees - discussion:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00046.html
-src package standard: proposal #5 and #5a:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00490.html
foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
foo-VER.tar.[bz2|gz] -- original source code
foo-VER-REL.patch -- the cygwinization patch
foo-VER-REL.sh -- a script to drive the whole
unpack/patch/configure/build/re-package procedure.
As to why the .gz(or.bz2) compressed "original source code" tarball is
included inside an .bz2 -src package, when the internal tarball can't
really be compressed further: it's the original. If I ungzip it, and
then bzip it, then it isn't the original version EXACTLY as distributed
by the upstream folks...
Hope that helps explain it.
--Chuck
Lapo Luchini wrote:
> Why the wget-1.8.1-1-src.tar.bz2 package does contain wget-1.8.1.tar.gz
> ?
> This is pretty peculiar and mroeover defeats any additional compression
> .bz2 could have versus .gz (compressed data is uncompressable even if it
> could be comperssed better with another compressor ^_^)?
>
> Just for curiosity =)
>
> BTW: in creating UPX package it'll have the strange erquirement that UPX
> source package needs also UCL source package (the installed binary isn't
> enough).
> Can that precedence be used, maybe documenting it in the
> Cygwin-doc/upx-...-1.txt o I shoul better include the sources needed to
> compile it also in UPC src directory to need only UCL library installed
> only?
>
> --
> Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
> lapo AT lapo DOT it (PGP & X.509 keys available)
> http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
>
>
>
- Raw text -