Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning:	hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu: khan owned process doing -bs
Date:	Wed, 26 Jan 2000 17:08:10 -0600 (CST)
From:	Mumit Khan <khan AT NanoTech DOT Wisc DOT EDU>
To:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
cc:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject:	Re: next net release preliminary info
In-Reply-To:	<20000126204839.22532.qmail@web110.yahoomail.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.HPP.3.96.1000126170132.15453C-100000@hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Earnie Boyd wrote:

> Well, that is one of the problems of managing dependencies.  IMO, the most
> recent stable versions of these libraries should be used anyway.  Yes, the
> official distributed version of a package, packages the dependency packages for
> convenience.  However, the Cygwin distribution isn't the official release and
> doesn't need the convenience of the packaged dependency package then Cygwin can
> and should package them separately so that the most current can be used.
> 
> Also, IMO, I consider it improper to package the dependencies with the package,
> but each should be made available independent of the package.  This allows, the
> most correct version to be used in all cases, especially for a project like
> Cygwin that packages so many separate packages.

I guess I simply don't understand Earnie's point. Could someone please 
explain what this dependency issue is? 

Would libiberty an example? Or, BFD? If so, it's extremely hard to make
sure you can get by with a single version for all the packages that
depend on it (especially true of BFD). I don't see the point in putting
all that effort in.

Regards,
Mumit

- Raw text -