This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Package Proposal: Xcoral
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Hello Igor,
> >> Use managed mounts to avoid renaming.
> > Please don't, at least not for the final package. I'd be very wary of
> > putting packages into the distribution that would require managed mounts
> > to build.
> Why? You can handle the build from a buildscript including mounting
> and umounting so you wouldn't even take notice of it. What at all do
> we have and use Cygwin for if we don't make use of its features?
I'm thinking of some people who'd want to use non-Cygwin tools to look at
and debug the package source. NTEmacs comes to mind.
> > Contact the upstream maintainers, and tell them that their package
> > is non-portable, and won't build on non-case-preserving filesystems.
> > Ask them to change the name of either control.h or Control.h. In
> > my experience, most projects (with the exception of a few that are
> > openly hostile towards any Windows tool) will accomodate Cygwin by
> > renaming the file (especially if it's a generated file).
> E.g. The "nail" maintainer with his aux.c file;)
That's one of'em, yes... :-)
> But then the cygwin xcoral maintainer tobe needs to wait until a new
> upstream release is available? Using managed mounts solves this issue
> in the best of all possible ways how to do s.th. like this.
Well, I guess a managed mount is okay as an interim measure until the
upstream package has the renamed file. But I'm uneasy about using this as
a standard way to build a package.
|\ _,,,---,,_ email@example.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ firstname.lastname@example.org
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing
whatever you think is worth doing." -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw