Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 20:24:46 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Any current plans for an SDL package?
Message-ID: <20031124012446.GA31953@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <bpmdt1$k4v$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <20031122024809 DOT GA28328 AT redhat DOT com> <bpr9gs$enu$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <6 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 22 DOT 0 DOT 20031123173938 DOT 0384b850 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1> <bpri4f$dht$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bpri4f$dht$1@sea.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 07:07:44PM -0500, unknown_kev_cat AT hotmail DOT com wrote:
>>While this sounds useful, I don't think it falls in the category of a
>>Cygwin package.  Packages offered with setup depend on cygwin1.dll in
>>some form.  What you're describing above doesn't fit this mold.  I
>>think that's what Chris was trying to point out.  This would be a good
>>package for this list to know about even if it doesn't target Cygwin
>>though.
>
>That does not make much sense, as AFAIK 'mingw-zlib' does not use
>cygwin1.dll in any way.
>
>Also by that definition the mingw libraries should not be availible via
>cygwin as they are not intended to be linked with cygwin1.dll

We provided mingw-zlib for a reason.  SDL does not fall into that
reason.  We are not going to be providing mingw-only libraries in the
cygwin distribution.

cgf

--
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/