DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:to:from:subject:message-id:date:mime-version
	:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=Rgzyy/PkIVzXWBNleacQlh7hx4kh6
	C8Q0MZjxr8Q+NWHHipiKzpxlcbfsdKc+4XLxdUHSCmUOxtTDXJLg5uRxxzLmyaTg
	z8Hxcw6ooAFJ+uhdpAy/8ifnGl/wxpF8FzuyfSmYhFjCuHLogemx8zjLg3ulKchb
	fQxWdI6S+TTXVA=
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
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: LRN <lrn1986 AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: cygwin port of glib
Message-ID: <dddf240b-0569-1e28-2e53-a5c833e12644@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 13:07:30 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J3IHtnHSDNdkKZd0MTIhqtzaBzJSc55eZ"

--J3IHtnHSDNdkKZd0MTIhqtzaBzJSc55eZ
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="CaR9Z5HzyBlBpvSuJD1lS8vJtS9TYssTy";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: LRN <lrn1986 AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <dddf240b-0569-1e28-2e53-a5c833e12644 AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: cygwin port of glib


--CaR9Z5HzyBlBpvSuJD1lS8vJtS9TYssTy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Looking at cygwin glib source package, i see a lot of downstream patches
applied to glib over the years (there are no dates, but the versions range =
from
2.34.3 to 2.50 - that might be as early as 2012 and as late as 2017) to mak=
e it
work correctly on cygwin.

Why are these not upstream (considering the fact that glib does have some
cygwin-specific code - clearly it's not because glib doesn't *want* cygwin
compatibility)?

Alternatively, since some of these patches *remove* cygwin-specific code fr=
om
glib (as, apparently, it was aimed at old versions of cygwin), why not ask =
glib
maintainers to remove cygwin support completely (which might simplify the
porting process, since cygwin glib maintainers won't have to guess which pa=
rts
of cygwin-specific code in glib are in working order, and which are not)? A=
lso,
since cygwin masquerades as a linux-flavoured POSIX platform, a more correct
approach for glib might be to perform appropriate configure-time checks and
then use their results to decide which code to compile, instead of blindly
trusting that a particular piece of code will work on
bsd/linux/cygwin/whatever. That would remove the need for some of those pat=
ches.


--CaR9Z5HzyBlBpvSuJD1lS8vJtS9TYssTy--

--J3IHtnHSDNdkKZd0MTIhqtzaBzJSc55eZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE4MWzR43wYaAzEA49ja3pJ2dZunQFAlx7p2cACgkQja3pJ2dZ
unQsGw//UfJWiNl0+t4TxPU2RIC+qpgAwyGkaVQdTxKPwTLGwMe4JdoQl7ZroQ8a
kKC/1dcZ+UCu+mbOZ8vzV1eX1XstNzzwdbN5svTs3z4kXLmjK3K0QKLKpyR7V0Ye
EFVXybXpjXYY5U557kyRKSoVIQ3jdCWeVzOKvekzeXOElrKzXaq0XeSVPiYYI11J
ff7Rf/FKqYsvAo4I4KC8/SWvgFbhy+qKIpQVjsQYAHPquDkRctm5CKaem1UXF8G+
1ox/E8HcuDa/F6Xek3dydBb6T+xBlVYGVrzQE4Ol9HjTzwLLKBhiQYwUTwVivbsM
RpkDxMTw3YHbP3M6HZ+hrhLds4xNPTyD3JMVHRG763egY6W5PTvD1cqy9bvAYqwz
mtrMliNyL3s4fbJQkVH9lc05N3lgESNUUAVE3nM+YaYb3W1EcSYoOLiFXM9Wk1lx
pbambCxfJAz3wg//y8VnEP9kxXLp/UgDhzIy7KBQ+ceU8TgpUn8TsPIB05LlPvd4
vsc8FmOBWNCuzlqf7vAnTtB5x8KWw2M1Kzz2EmOcPigTU2y6JwY1pC7kHSK6w6wO
vQ3+YxUz005yWAPu7th3EmJGy06WA1mFlo8KUuYP2LYNkZfkgmfpBrZUSV45tNQV
aijodNjAkv0Kf1d2b9tRd184qewE6vFuorKo9WZAnaQ+VvLpAmE=
=iPM6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--J3IHtnHSDNdkKZd0MTIhqtzaBzJSc55eZ--