Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <3C544E86.5080203@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 14:01:26 -0500 From: Charles Wilson 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: Jan Nieuwenhuizen CC: JXrXme-Georges-Michel BENOIT , cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: usr/doc/[cC]ygwin requirement References: <3c543e6f3cf44ec7 AT mel-rta10 DOT wanadoo DOT fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Ah, ok. I don't think this is of much importance, but > cygwin.com/setup.html says: > > * In your binary package, include a file > /usr/doc/Cygwin/foo-vendor-suffix.README > > Before I went there to check, I tried to look if there was a > convention for this, but strangely enough, none of the packages I > checked had a usr/doc/Cygwin at all (cygwin, bash, gawk, textutils, > ed)?. Most of the packages you listed pre-date the /usr/doc/Cygwin requirement. In an ideal world, the next release of each would then follow this new requirement -- but this isn't an ideal world. :-P *New* packages, however, should follow this convention -- and tetex probably should, as well, even though it isn't exactly new. Whgy? Because from this outsider's perspective, it sure seems like tetex needs lots of tweaking and TLC to build on Cygwin -- and those tweaks should be documented... --Chuck