Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com From: michael-ring AT t-online DOT de (Michael Ring) To: Charles Wilson Cc: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: I would like to release a new version of bzip2, any objections ? Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:59:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <396B50A7 DOT EF3AAF00 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> In-Reply-To: <396B50A7.EF3AAF00@ece.gatech.edu> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Sender: 320032306730-0001 AT t-dialin DOT net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id MAA02131 On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:51:51 -0400, you wrote: >Please do. The omission of libbz2.a is the reason bzip is included on >CygUtils. I wasn't sure who the maintainer of the bzip package was, so I >never got around to investigating and trying to get a complete package >into latest. > >FWIW, libbz2.a is useful for building tar with the bzip patch. > >RFC: I think that libbz2 is a purely functional interface, so it should >not be too hard to create libbz2.dll. gcc -shared might make this a snap >to do, but you'll need an ld.exe with very recent patches. I can send >you a binary if you need it -- I don't think my binutils patches from >last Friday have been pushed into CVS yet... > Yes, please! I am doing all this to get latest in sync with my rpm-development. If I can include .dll's that's 1 big step closer to my personal goal. >(Is providing libbz2.dll a good idea? Even if provided, IMO bzip2.exe >and bunzip2.exe should be built using -static) Yes, they should be static, rpm should also be static but all the rest should be linked dynamic. > >--Chuck > Michael