LPRng issues (fwd)

[Pavel Tsekov]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Max Bowsher wrote:

> > What about including a directory named CYGWIN-PATCHES in the source
> > tarball ? It should include the setup.hint file and the README file.
> > This will require a patch I guess.
> >
> > If I am wrong, please, someone correct me.
> 
> You are not wrong, but there is more to say:
> 
> AFAIK, a README is not _required_. Neither is it required (also AFAIK) for
> setup.hint to be *inside* the tarball (after all, if anyone wants it, they
> can always grab it from any Cygwin mirror).

How about this text from http://cygwin.com/setup.html:
[ ... ]
In general, any cygwin-specific "packaging" files -- such as 
cygwin-specific READMEs, a copy of the setup.hint file for your package, 
etc. -- should unpack within a /CYGWIN-PATCHES/ subdirectory in your 
sources. Naturally, applying the patch (in reverse, as described above) 
would remove these files from the source tree.
[ ... ]

I understand the "should" doesn't mean "must" but I think that this 
recommendation should be followed. Maybe I'm the only one here who cannot
get the right meaning of the instructions :)

> So, he *could* just put up the pure unchanged source tarball, if and only if
> it builds with "./configure && make" with no options or patches.
> 
> Now, personally, I think method 2 (script-based) packaging is best, so I'd
> suggest having a look at the "Method Two" section of
> http://cygwin.com/setup.html.

Yep. I think Method Two simplifies the things a lot and takes care for a
lot of things like the patch, the files in CYGWIN-PATCHES, etc. 
Once you get used to it and tweak the script it does a very good job.
For example I first packaged MC using Method One, but now the new version
uses Method Two and I'm quite happy with it. Also it is quite usefull if 
for some reason one want to compile on multiple platforms - you just move 
the source tarball on the destination platform and run the script.