Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3C91F6F4.DEE68FD2@yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:28:20 -0500
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
CC:	Lapo Luchini <lapo AT lapo DOT it>, CygWin-Apps <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)
References:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA760014BC8 AT itdomain003 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au>

Robert Collins wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lapo Luchini [mailto:lapo AT lapo DOT it]
> > Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:48 PM
> 
> > But if a cygwin
> > native version is needed nonetheless I could volunteer to package it.
> 
> IMO we should have a fully self-hosted distribution. At the moment, with
> the _single_ exception of postgresql, every package here can be rebuilt
> from source, to a version equivalent to what the package maintainer
> posted, on a cygwin system, with the tools that the distribution has. So
> yes, UPX should be a package before it's used to make packages.
> 
> I vote for including UPX... and Lapo makes two. Do we need a third? And
> are there any objections?
> 

Does UPX come with an API library that you can just use in setup?

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

- Raw text -