This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: patches to vendor source trees - discussion
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 12:39:51AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote
> >>You've stated several times that you're looking only at "baby
> >>steps" -- but
> >>I think baby steps are counterproductive here. Imagine a
> > I agree in principle. The issues I percieve is that
> > 1) setup.exe isn't ready for more than bare bones changes - regardless
> > of rpm or dpkg inspiration.
I would prefer to keep it simple. And since we already have seen
implementations of rpm for Cygwin (regardless of the "replace
DLL/EXE while running" problem) I would propose the rpm way which
would easily fit in our current packaging scheme.
- setup.exe creates the /usr/src/cygwin directory and it's subdirs
BUILD, RPMS, SOURCES, SPECS and SRPMS.
- Our current tar.bz2/tar.gz source packages are copied on demand into
/usr/src/cygwin/SOURCES. They will not extracted in future.
- New packages or new versions of existing packages could choose to
repack as genuine .tar.[bg]z* file (using the already existing naming
convention plus a patch file which is
called package-<version>-<cygwin subversion>.dif
- If a package maintainer likes, he can choose to add a
package-<version>-<cygwin subversion>.spec file to the directory
which then will be copied to /usr/src/cygwin/SPECS.
That's all. And that's everything which should be done by setup, IMO.
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:email@example.com
Red Hat, Inc.