Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <4170586B.9020901@mystfans.com> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:08:27 +0200 From: Soeren Nils Kuklau User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Macintosh/20040913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Distributing Cygwin-based software References: <416ED440 DOT 4000309 AT chucker DOT rasdi DOT net> <41705111 DOT 5040604 AT mystfans DOT com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Igor Pechtchanski wrote: >On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, Soeren Nils Kuklau wrote: > > > >> [ sha1 call doesn't link ] > > >Try linking it with -lcrypto? ;-) I'm surprised it works on OS/X, though. > > LDFLAGS = -lpthread -lcrypto We do. ;-) > This is *not* the right list for discussing how to subvert the existing > >Cygwin installations on users' machines by distributing your own copy of >cygwin1.dll (though this *has* been discussed in the past - search the >list archives). > Okay, but what /would/ be the right place? Since I don't think people will be willing to install Cygwin just for being able to use a single other piece of software... Think Gtk for Windows programs (such as Gaim): they come with the proper frameworks included, so the user won't have to worry about that. >Cygwin is an emulation layer. The Cygwin distribution contains a set of >packages that use this emulation layer. > > Exactly - but where to discuss projects that use the emulation layer and aren't part of the distribution (thought they might eventually be)? >>At the same time, however, we do not want Windows-based users to feel >>forced into Cygwin's behaviours. We want to distribute a Windows >>application - GPL'd, with some Unix-style quirks, and compatible to the >>other major OS'es out there, but Windows nevertheless. >> >> >So maybe the MinGW project is more like what you're looking for, then. > > Indeed; we're looking into it. >>Those who truly want a full Unix experience wouldn't use Windows in the >>first place, and thus not Cygwin either. >> >> >This is not true at all (to put it mildly). Those who want POSIX behavior >on Windows *will* (and *do*) use Cygwin. But this particular point is >better ed. > Right, but I wouldn't define "POSIX behaviour" as "full Unix experience" ;-) But yes, that's OT. Thanks for the responses, -- Soeren 'Chucker' Kuklau -- 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/