Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:37:01 -0500
From: Bob Rossi <bob_rossi AT cox DOT net>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Why only 1 cygwin1.dll?
Message-ID: <20060325213701.GA18453@brasko.net>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <032520061719 DOT 9189 DOT 44257B9C0003FD3F000023E522058891160A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <ba40711f0603250938q65c67279v44ce4075b27887c2 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20060325174051 DOT GA9046 AT brasko DOT net> <20060325175656 DOT GD14449 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060325175656.GD14449@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:56:56PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:40:51PM -0500, Bob Rossi wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:38:53PM -0500, Lev Bishop wrote:
> >> FAQ candidate? Either of Eric's explanations seem spot on, to me. And
> >> this question does come up fairly regularly.
> >
> >In the FAQ, I think it would be a good idea to mention that this
> >limitation makes it impossible (outside of setup.exe) to package an 
> >application based on Cygwin and guarantee that it runs on the host 
> >machine. That is, it's impossible to determine if the cygwin1.dll is
> >already on the machine.
> 
> It is certainly not impossible.
> 
> We support the cygwin release here.  That does not preclude (except for
> lack of interest apparently) someone providing providing a nifty tool
> for determining if/when to install a 3PP cygwin DLL but we all know that
> anyone who wants that automatically is only able to complain about the
> lack of such a tool.  It's been a given for years in this mailing list
> and I doubt that it will change anytime soon.  The best that people seem
> to be able to do is complain about how much they want to do this here
> and predict the death of cygwin if something isn't changed to
> accommodate their desires.

Hi Christopher,

I certainly didn't mean to complain. I really love Cygwin and wouldn't
ever predict it's death. I can't work without it on windows.

However, I still think that it's not possible, without a horrid solution. 
The problem with the third party tool is that it would need to be run every 
time before the third party application is run. If the user installed Cygwin, 
remove the local cygwin1.dll. If the user removed Cygwin, replace the removed
cygwin1.dll. Very odd. Does this sound like a reasonable solution to
you (although I'll admit it's possible)?

Bob Rossi

--
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/