patches to vendor source trees - discussion
Mon Nov 12 10:06:00 GMT 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gareth Pearce" <email@example.com>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 6:34 AM
Subject: Re: patches to vendor source trees - discussion
> > Secondly, IMO setup.exe should _ask_ where the source should go, not
> > extract into /usr/src. The rpm way, at this point, becomes a
> > (How many CYGWIN directories do you want hanging around?).
> I think I just changed my mind...
> I now support #3 ... under the following condition
> that the setup 'ask where to install' allows support for an option
> 'in subdirectory by name' which takes the src package name and unpacks
> a directory under the directory specified, named by taking the tarball
> going from start of name till first - or . (probably -). So that I
> then put that as my default - and be happy.
I'll accept patches for this. IMO it's unneeded, but I've no objection
as long as it's not the default option.
> That combination thus allows for #3 and #4 in one.
> Although I do think that some sort of standard for the name of
> where built things are put, relative to the install directory, would
> good. Which #1 #4 but not #3 have ... as far as I can remember.
#3 does - they get build under the source tree. I.e. in .build and
More information about the Cygwin-apps