Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID: <382F44B2.B689E8E1@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 18:24:34 -0500
From: "Charles S. Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: windres and CONTROL object
References: <000101bf2e50$40a4b260$5265000a AT jching DOT alii DOT com> <199911141753 DOT LAA03212 AT mercury DOT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu> <19991114172609 DOT B782 AT cygnus DOT com> <382F3D87 DOT 2D226A30 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <19991114181008 DOT A1089 AT cygnus DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Chris Faylor wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Nov 14, 1999 at 05:53:59PM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> >I'll do perl.  Does the build need to be built using Cygwin v1.0 or
> >using the latest development snapshots?  This is an important question
> >because perl has lots of libraries, .a and .dll.  Which
> >compiler/version?  Should perl be built with libcrypt or without?
> 
> Actually, I was just going to confine the net release to whatever has
> been in a normal release in the past, i.e., no perl.  DJ and I have been
> talking about doing a major reorg of the web/ftp site to accomodate
> external packages more easily but it will require human bandwidth.
> 

Oh. Okay. 

> As far as "built using Cygwin v1.0 or using the latest development
> snapshots" is concerned, I'm not sure precisely what you mean.  If you
> are not releasing libraries or object files, it doesn't matter what
> version of cygwin you use as long as the cygwin DLL is named
> cygwin1.dll. 

Well, I do release libraries (and support files): "libperl.a"
"libperls.a" "libperl.dll" "libperl.def". Plus, all the modules are
.dll's. 

I know that perl.exe will work with whatever cygwin1.dll, be it b20.1's,
v1.0's, or b21's. EXE's are backward compatible, as long as the cygwin
DLL is "cygwin1.dll".

I *believe* that all the dll's will also be okay. DLL's are really just
EXE's with some extra stuff -- or so I've been told.

However, it has been stated repeatedly that (static?) libraries and
object files are NOT backward compatible. I'm not distributing any .o's,
but those two static libraries are a concern: libperl.a and libperls.a.
Now, it is possible that I don't need to distribute these two files;
that would solve the problem in the simplest way possible. However, I
seem to remember difficulty compiling modules without them, but I
haven't tried that recently.

> The preference would be, of course, that you use the
> latest cygwin stub library and latest DLL, however.

Okay.

--Chuck

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com