Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Message-ID: <036401c0ff5c$a01552c0$806410ac@local>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert.collins@itdomain.com.au>
To: "John Wiersba" <John.Wiersba@medstat.com>, <cygwin@cygwin.com>
References: <03F4742D8225D21191EF00805FE62B9908E23EDD@aa-msg-01.medstat.com>
Subject: Re: "shouted down", "shot down", apologies
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:58:04 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wiersba" <John.Wiersba@medstat.com>
> Well, what I'd like to do, and what should be standard for any package
> accepted into the cygwin archive (available to be downloaded with
> setup.exe), is that each package source tarball should build
out-of-the-box
> under cygwin with a simple make configure; make; make test (check?); make
> install, including the most recent "stable" cygwin source tarball.  With a

For everything but cygwin1.dll, that _should_ work. Us maintainers put
pre-patched source (if cygwin patches are needed) into the src tarball. Have
you tried? If you've tried and a package didn't work, report a bug to the
maintainer - they will take it seriously. If you're asking a hyopthetical
"have the cygwin package maintainers done the obvious thing" then I think
you're wasting my time.

Some packages such as cygwin1.dll and gcc _WILL NOT_ build in the same
directory as the source. For them you need
mkdir pkgdir
cd pkgdir
tar xzf /path/to/tarball
mkdir obj
cd obj
../extractedpackagesrc/configure
make

Hope that answers the question.

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/