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: <3C91F6F4.DEE68FD2@yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:28:20 -0500 From: Earnie Boyd X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Collins CC: Lapo Luchini , CygWin-Apps Subject: Re: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Collins wrote: > > > -----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? > Does UPX come with an API library that you can just use in setup? Earnie. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com