Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3CBDBBAE.3040802@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:15:10 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lapo Luchini <lapo AT lapo DOT it>
CC: Mailing List: CygWin <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: strange source packaging?
References: <3CBDA9CF DOT 877BBFA4 AT lapo DOT it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Currently, there are three dominant -src packaging standards.

1. As detailed on
http://cygwin.com/setup.html#package_contents
foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
   foo-VER[-REL]/
   foo-VER[-REL]/source files
   foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs
   foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs/source files
   foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES
   foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES/the-patch (*)

(*) already applied to the source tree.  Use this to REVERT to the 
"pristine" source.

2. packages which have cygwin-adapted source maintained in a 
cygwin-hosted CVS repository (e.g. gcc, cygwin itself, binutils, make, a 
few others).

foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
   foo[-VER[-REL]]/
   foo[-VER[-REL]]/source files
   foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs
   foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs/source files

In this scheme, there is no "cygwin patch" -- the cygwin version is 
basically a fork.  If you want to know how the cygwin-specific source 
differs from the "official" version, you must get both sources and do 
the diff yourself.

3. A method hashed out on the cygwin-apps list last november:

patches to vendor source trees - discussion:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00046.html

-src package standard: proposal #5 and #5a:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00490.html

foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus:
   foo-VER.tar.[bz2|gz] -- original source code
   foo-VER-REL.patch    -- the cygwinization patch
   foo-VER-REL.sh       -- a script to drive the whole 
unpack/patch/configure/build/re-package procedure.

As to why the .gz(or.bz2) compressed "original source code" tarball is 
included inside an .bz2 -src package, when the internal tarball can't 
really be compressed further:  it's the original.  If I ungzip it, and 
then bzip it, then it isn't the original version EXACTLY as distributed 
by the upstream folks...

Hope that helps explain it.

--Chuck

Lapo Luchini wrote:

> Why the wget-1.8.1-1-src.tar.bz2 package does contain wget-1.8.1.tar.gz
> ?
> This is pretty peculiar and mroeover defeats any additional compression
> .bz2 could have versus .gz (compressed data is uncompressable even if it
> could be comperssed better with another compressor ^_^)?
> 
> Just for curiosity =)
> 
> BTW: in creating UPX package it'll have the strange erquirement that UPX
> source package needs also UCL source package (the installed binary isn't
> enough).
> Can that precedence be used, maybe documenting it in the
> Cygwin-doc/upx-...-1.txt o I shoul better include the sources needed to
> compile it also in UPC src directory to need only UCL library installed
> only?
> 
> --
> Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
> lapo AT lapo DOT it (PGP & X.509 keys available)
> http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
> 
> 
>