Not GTG (was Re: PING: Proposal for Boost 1.33.0 package)

Corinna Vinschen corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Thu Aug 18 09:26:00 GMT 2005


On Aug 18 10:58, Vaclav Haisman wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Brian Dessent wrote:
> >Vaclav Haisman wrote:
> >># Boost 1.33.0 Cygwin package setup.hint
> >>sdesc: "Boost 1.33.0 main package"
> >>ldesc: "Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.
> >
> >This is still not the correct format for sdesc and ldesc.  You should
> >not start sdesc with the name of the package.  It should describe the
> >package, and not mention the version number.  More appropriate would be:
> >
> >sdesc: "portable C++ libraries useful across a broad spectrum of
> >applications"
> [...]
> >Brian
> 
> Fixed, the files are on the web.

I just had a look into the boost packages and from my point of view they
are not GTG, for various reasons.

- Your latest setup.hint files have a "skip:" field, which is somewhat
  counterproductive, see http://cygwin.com/setup.html

- Also, drop the "curr:" lines as long as you don't have a conflicting
  version numbering scheme or a "test" release.

- The Cygwin naming convention of DLLs is not used:

    usr/bin/libboost_date_time-mt.dll

  should (at least) be

    usr/bin/cygboost_date_time-mt.dll

- The DLLs are not versioned.  They are on Linux:

    /usr/lib/libboost_date_time-gcc-1_33.so.1.33.0

  should on Cygwin be something like

    usr/bin/cygboost_date_time-mt-1.dll

  and the runtime package should be named libboost1 to allow later,
  backward incompatible versions.  If you're sure that this won't be
  necessary, then forget this point.

- The naming convention for static and dynamic link libs is not used:

    usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt-s.a  (-s == static?)
    usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt.a

  should be

    usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt.a
    usr/lib/libboost_date_time-mt.dll.a

- However, on second inspection it also looks like the devel package is
  wrongly packed, too.  All -s.a and .a files with the same name are
  equally sized.  Using nm on them shows that both variations are actually
  static libraries.  So there are no link libs to link against the DLLs
  right now.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.



More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list