This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: HEADS-UP: Modular X11 (ALL maintainers, please read)
Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:
But after 5 years, I think we can get rid of it.
BTW, my version of sxpm DOES use my cygXpm-X4.dll; without using
libW11 or something similar, sxpm can't work in non-X mode. I'll
just remove it from xpm-nox. cxpm uses noX, so I'll rename my
version as you suggested.
Test version xpm-nox-4.2.0-5 is up on sourceware, with the following
filelist:
cxpm is only dependent on cygwin, so I wonder if even this is necessary.
Err...sortof. It's true that cxpm doesn't link against any *xpm* DLL.
That's because it directly includes various .o's from the libXpm/lib
when linking.
So, cxpm-nox uses *different* xpm code than cxpm-x does: in fact,
cxpm-nox exercises the code inside cygXpm-noX4.dll (it just has its own
copy of that binary code), while cxpm(-x) exercises its own copy of the
code inside cygXpm-4.dll.
So, there really should be two different versions of cxpm -- 'cause they
are different.
Right now I have cxpm and sxpm in the same package, but it wouldn't be
a big deal to separate them, so that cxpm can be installed without
pulling in sxpm's dependencies (8 X11 libraries).
No, I think you should leave it as is. Your 'cxpm.exe' and 'sxpm.exe'
should be the official ones; my cxpm-noX is just a "hey, cygXpm-noX4.dll
kinda works maybe" indicator.
Otherwise, this looks good. Thank you for taking care of this.
Sure -- now I just need to redo some of my pending ITPs. <g>
--
Chuck