Fri May 5 16:51:00 GMT 2006
On 5/4/06, Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> Portage itself was already vetoed, as it would mean entirely changing
> the distro management scheme, and Portage just isn't meant for only
> building packages. cygport is much simpler, doesn't require changing
> the distro entirely, and was written with Cygwin in mind by someone
> (namely, me) with a repository of 1400 Cygwin binary packages.
Though my opinion doesn't officially mean anything yet (I haven't
successfully contributed a package yet, but I am thinking of packaging
an AVR toolchain, using cygport... new thread forthcoming), I like
this package. Bravo!
Perhaps it would be slightly more elegant to put the cygclass files in
$prefix/share/cygport and export all of the functions defined in the
cygport script itself into tidy .sh files in $prefix/lib/cygport/lib?
I'm not strongly advocating these particular paths, but I kinda feel
like the *.cygport files are misplaced and that the cygport script
itself could be modularized one step farther.
More information about the Cygwin-apps