X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,TW_YG,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4F838387.1070705@etr-usa.com> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:49:11 -0600 From: Warren Young User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cygwin-L Subject: Re: Can RPM packages be installed into Cygwin? References: <4F7FEF5B DOT 5060206 AT gmail DOT com> <4F7FF6FB DOT 7070206 AT gmail DOT com> <4F810192 DOT 40806 AT gmail DOT com> <4F813482 DOT 2020101 AT gmail DOT com> <4F82FC50 DOT 50805 AT gmail DOT com> In-Reply-To: <4F82FC50.50805@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 On 4/9/2012 9:12 AM, De-Jian Zhao wrote: > the compilation > always stopped at "checking python" even after python was installed. My wild guess based on no personal experience with BLAST+ is that there is some linkage error here. I'd have to try it myself (not interested) or examine the config.log file (still not interested) to figure out if this guess is correct. I'd bet there are more Cygwin-using BLAST+ users on the BLAST+ mailing list than on the Cygwin list, so you'd have a better chance of getting a solution by sending the config.log file to that list than continuing to pursue this problem here. Instead of trying to start with RPM, I'd recommend figuring out how to build BLAST+ to build from source first. You need that experience to help you build binary packages. I think you'll have an easier time learning to build a native Cygwin package than trying to get the .src.rpm file to rebuild on Cygwin: http://cygwin.com/setup.html That page gives several methods for building Cygwin packages. I'd recommend going with the Cygport option. Cygport does fewer things than RPM, so building .cygport files is easier than building RPM .spec files. (In Cygwin, much of the rest of what RPM does lives in setup.exe and cygcheck.exe.) I doubt there's enough value in the existing BLAST+ .spec file to make it an easier path for you than building a .cygport file from scratch. > Then what is [the rpm package] for? It is for people who wish to build a secondary packaging system on top of Cygwin's native system. It doesn't magically port Linux RPM packages over for you. You still have to do that work yourself. And, you have to do that work without having the benefit of an ecosystem of existing RPM binary packages, upon which that BLAST+ .spec file probably depends. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple