Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com From: Chris Faylor Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 15:43:52 -0500 To: DJ Delorie Cc: earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com, cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: next net release preliminary info Message-ID: <20000126154352.A5426@cygnus.com> Mail-Followup-To: DJ Delorie , earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com, cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com References: <20000126162956 DOT 4192 DOT qmail AT web111 DOT yahoomail DOT com> <200001262027 DOT PAA06771 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200001262027.PAA06771@envy.delorie.com>; from dj@delorie.com on Wed, Jan 26, 2000 at 03:27:43PM -0500 On Wed, Jan 26, 2000 at 03:27:43PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote: > >> This is good too. I would like to see the things common to each package, >> things like readline, intl, etc. moved to this level and removed from the >> package for the sake of the cygwin distributions as well. This would cut down >> on the size of each package but would require managing dependencies >> differently. > >But, the officially released packages each have different versions of >these common things. What then? Hmm. When I hear dependencies, I think Makefile. How about a "make install" for the binary packages? cgf