This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: cygport limitations
- From: Warren Young <warren at etr-usa dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:10:21 -0600
- Subject: Re: cygport limitations
- References: <CABEPuQJDLjtbcLig1isTUJgb6RBCD8LNShbm9mTPcb9WM5S5fw at mail dot gmail dot com> <51C0B08E dot 8080900 at etr-usa dot com> <CABEPuQJJpRfPKSwZ7M0eTOdp1HxDcmvuy1=qXFHBw-8kLkZ1ZQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51C0D956 dot 4090905 at etr-usa dot com> <51C1B299 dot 1000701 at cwilson dot fastmail dot fm> <51C1F0F9 dot 70601 at etr-usa dot com> <51C1FA8E dot 3000307 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <51C33F38 dot 4080103 at etr-usa dot com> <20130620181056 dot GA16923 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51C495E1 dot 9040901 at etr-usa dot com>
On 6/21/2013 12:05, Warren Young wrote:
On 6/20/2013 12:10, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
If every maintainer would use cygport, it would allow us to change
the build method to one along the lines of most Linux distros.
In Linux distros, the maintainer provides only the spec file and
the source archive. The actual build for all supported platforms
could be done on a machine which creates the distro from there.
With cygport, you wouldn't even need to provide sources. We could email
in the new cygport file instead of an RFU.
...and customized .hint files, if needed.
Yeah, I guess sending the .src.tar.bz2 probably is effectively required.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple