[PATCH] setup -e, --separate-src-dirs option

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Thu Dec 15 20:59:00 GMT 2011

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 08:19:12PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Dec 15 13:10, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 07:38:14AM +0100, Christian Franke wrote:
>> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:16:40PM +0100, Christian Franke wrote:
>> >>> Many -src packages install files in /usr/src which have no
>> >>> PACKAGE[-VERSION] prefix or substring in file name. This makes it
>> >>> difficult to maintain or cleanup larger /usr/src directories.
>> >>>
>> >>> The attached experimental patch for setup.exe adds option  -e,
>> >>> --separate-src-dirs. If specified, each PACKAGE-VERSION-src.tar.bz2 is
>> >>> installed below /usr/src/PACKAGE-VERSION instead.
>> >> If this is really desirable behavior then shouldn't we ask package
>> >> maintainers to fix their packages?  I don't see why setup.exe should
>> >> have to know about this.
>> >>
>> >
>> >The patch is a pragmatic approach which works with all existing 
>> >packages. It doesn't break anything existing. It would last long time 
>> >until all src tarballs would be fixed.
>> >
>> >It is actually difficult to guess the origin of some source files. For 
>> >example:
>> >
>> >/usr/src/0.19-data-auto-imports.patch (from flexdll-0.26-1)
>> >/usr/src/blacklist.txt (from ca-cerficates-*)
>> >/usr/src/config-rpath.patch (from some gcc-* ?)
>> That's not difficult.  It's trivial to figure out where these files
>> came from.
>> I still don't understand the need for this.  If everyone thinks it's
>> a good idea than why don't we eschew code bloat and make package
>> developers use this technique.  Otherwise, unless you inspect the
>> source files, you'll be adding a separate layer of directory to
>> /usr/src for packages that don't need it.
>I don't see a problem with that.  I don't think it's the better approach
>to wait for all package maintainers to create new source packages.  It's
>much easier to do it once and for all in setup.

I think it's lame to have something like, e.g.,


sitting in my /usr/src.  I find that nearly as objectionable as having
files littered in /usr/src.

If this is enforced we can't wait for package maintainers to create new
source packages.  If they create new source packages with uniquely named
directories then they will fall prey to the above.

If everyone thinks this is the way to go then I can change all of the
source files in ~release and people can change their procedures going


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list