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: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <3BE70EAC.6000805@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 17:11:56 -0500
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: patches to vendor source trees - discussion
References: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF7A48 AT itdomain002 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <3BE4D4A7 DOT 2070900 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011104104732 DOT X17306 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <1004867892 DOT 5388 DOT 54 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <3BE702C3 DOT 5010008 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011105230511 DOT J17306 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 04:21:07PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>>My proposal (revised)
>>   Use the standard RPM tree (SOURCES, BUILD, SPEC, RPMS, SRPMS)
>>   -src is a tarball which contains
>>     SOURCES/foo-VER-REL-orig.tar.bz2
>>     SOURCES/foo-VER-REL.diff (creates the cgywin README)
>>     SOURCES/foo-VER-REL-X.diff (if necessary)
>>     SPECS/foo-VER-REL.*
>>       .spec or .sh or .rule or whatever.
>>   setup unpacks this into /usr/src/cygwin.
>>   the end.  Nothing else is specified yet.
>>
> 
> Your proposal has a disadvantage:  The src package isn't
> compatible to the current packaging scheme.
> 
> ==> All packages have to be repacked.  A clear no-no, IMO.


No, it IS compatible -- since you unpack the -src tarball at the 
"usr/src/cygwin/ level, OLD style src tarballs will create this:

/usr/src/cygwin/foo-VER/*

NEW style src tarballs will create this:

/usr/src/cygwin/SOURCES/foo-VER-orig.tar.bz2
etc.

Granted, *ideally* you'd unpack new -src tarballs at the /usr/src/cygwin/ 
level, and you'd unpack old -src tarballs at the /usr/src/ level, but I 
don't think my way is too terrible...

--Chuck