Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning:	hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu: khan owned process doing -bs
Date:	Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:04:04 -0600 (CST)
From:	Mumit Khan <khan AT NanoTech DOT Wisc DOT EDU>
To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: MinGW libstdc++.a [WAS: Re: Has sys/stat.h changed]
In-Reply-To:	<3A9294F1.639E4A19@yahoo.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.HPP.3.96.1010220120159.14045B-100000@hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Earnie Boyd wrote:

> A separate package would be best to distribute this.  It could be named
> mingw-libstdc++.tar.gz.  The question I have is how to distribute the
> source for just the library, it's already distributed with gcc source,
> correct?  So a README saying which package the source can be found would
> suffice, correct?

Cygwin packages already use /usr/doc, and that's where we can put the
README's for mingw packages. I don't see any problem of pointing to the
larger source package (that's the case for say GCC RPMs for RedHat Linux
for example -- the binaries are split among many packages, with a single
source RPM). 

Regards,
Mumit

- Raw text -