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>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Subject: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:04:36 +1100
Message-ID: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA760014BC8@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)
Thread-Index: AcHMINFRHhV1IFhFSQqO6VZo4TpixgAAMhkQ
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Lapo Luchini" <lapo AT lapo DOT it>, "CygWin-Apps" <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g2FD4qH28244



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lapo Luchini [mailto:lapo AT lapo DOT it] 
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:48 PM

> But if a cygwin 
> native version is needed nonetheless I could volunteer to package it.

IMO we should have a fully self-hosted distribution. At the moment, with
the _single_ exception of postgresql, every package here can be rebuilt
from source, to a version equivalent to what the package maintainer
posted, on a cygwin system, with the tools that the distribution has. So
yes, UPX should be a package before it's used to make packages.

I vote for including UPX... and Lapo makes two. Do we need a third? And
are there any objections?

Rob