Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <3E4538CA.8000902@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 12:05:14 -0500 From: Earnie Boyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: So, *should* I go back to distributing the mingw/w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball? References: <20030208164444 DOT GA8989 AT redhat DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christopher Faylor wrote: > The subject says it all. If I don't distribute the mingw and w32api > sources, I stand the chance of releasing a version of the sources that > won't build until the next release of mingw or w32api. I don't want to > have to go through the effort of coordinating with Earnie every time I > release cygwin so the alternative is to go back to including the mingw > and w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball. > > I don't like the thought of duplication here but I guess I've finally > grown weary of the bug reports from people who can't build from the > sources available via tarball. > I'm not going to say much about it other than, I empathize with you. Perhaps a symlink to the installed versions would do? Earnie.