This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Cygport and auto-manifestize compatibility manifest
- From: Peter Rosin <peda at lysator dot liu dot se>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:58:31 +0100
- Subject: Re: Cygport and auto-manifestize compatibility manifest
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131120132853 dot GN2936 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <528CCB69 dot 4030804 at cwilson dot fastmail dot fm> <20131120150101 dot GQ2936 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <20131120154327 dot GA3501 at ednor dot casa dot cgf dot cx> <20131120160637 dot GT2936 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
On 2013-11-20 17:06, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 20 10:43, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:01:01PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Nov 20 09:47, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>> I know, SHTDI...
>>>
>>> Yes, that's pretty much the problem. Even my ugly workaround is bad,
>>> because it only works on Windows. No more cross-building on Linux :-P
>>
>> Some more ugly hacks: Could cygwin itself create the manifests when it
>> runs a program iff they don't exist? Or, alternately, setup.exe? Or
>> rebase?
>
> Cygwin itself, never I guess. See my other mail I just sent.
> As I said, *extremly* sensitive. Rinse and repeat.
>
> Setup could do it, but the problem is the existence of sections with
> long section names, especially debug sections and the .gnu_debuglink
> section. It's quite the mess and rather complicated to perform since
> you need to be sure to filter out the problematic sections, or better,
> to perform the action *after* strip, and *before* adding the
> .gnu_debuginfo section.
One snag with having setup do it, is that package maintainers running
'make check' will not test what is actually deployed (unless jumping
through hoops).
The behavior of the exes did change with the manifest after all, which
was the whole point with all this manifest crap, right?
Cheers,
Peter