Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 22:41:13 +0400
From: egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.45) Personal
Reply-To: egor duda <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Organization: deo
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <17105307514.20010501224113@logos-m.ru>
To: Andy Piper <andyp AT bea DOT com>
CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: When will cygwin ever be stable?
In-reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010501102110.02e99390@san-francisco.beasys.com>
References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 2 DOT 20010501102110 DOT 02e99390 AT san-francisco DOT beasys DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi!

Tuesday, 01 May, 2001 Andy Piper andyp AT bea DOT com wrote:

>>What does "the headers change the whole time" mean?  What specifically

AP> It means that each time I install a new version of w32api or the mingw 
AP> one's I have to fix XEmacs compilation in some way or other.

>>caused you problems?  Was it the move of headers to /usr/include/w32api?

AP> That didn't help. My problem is not whether this was a good or bad thing to 
AP> do, but rather that it changed again (remember the move to the new headers 
AP> etc?)

i wonder if it was my changes to w32api that change _ANONYMOUS_*
semantics? they surely can break applications that include headers
individually without including <windows.h> first. since you didn't
state yet what exactly the problem with headers was, i can only guess.
if some application included individual w32api headers without
<windows.h>, i think it's wrong. i think you understand that api
writer should make some assumptions about how this api will be used
and act accordingly. "always include windows.h" is, i think, quite
logical assumption. and, speaking of this specific change, it was made
to not break programs that do include windows.h

i think you understand that "don't change it in any way" is a bit,
uhm, unrealistic attitude.

i wholeheartedly agree that lots of cygwin users will benefit from
rock-stable cygwin. the main question is "what cygwin team should do
for this?" don't change anything? this won't make things stable.
maintain "stable" and "development" branches? well, perhaps somebody
will be doing this, but the question of "should we merge w32api
changes from devel branch to the stable one, and if we should, then
when?" is still unanswered.

Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19



--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple