X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <482ECBC0.9090601@sh.cvut.cz> Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 14:12:48 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?VsOhY2xhdiBIYWlzbWFu?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Why are cygwin files (exe. dlls etc. ) not version stamped on Windows? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 qa4ever@gmail.com wrote, On 14.5.2008 11:50: | Why are cygwin files (exe. dlls etc. ) not version stamped on Windows? Because that would involve adding Windows resources to the files which is not something that source code targetted for *nix usually does. It would involve patching the source which is what maintainers are usually trying to avoid if possible. There are also --{major,minor}-image-version flags for ld but I am not sure these are the right thing for that (though I have used them to mark Boost .dlls as 1.33). - -- VH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEAREIAAYFAkguy8AACgkQoUFWwtEPkHJVnQCdHfBIFXaRKogtNF+DMB5NNAdF 42MAn3C3f+zDthDXJXKWHVIVvjb71RoH =ohb3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/