[64bit] Biber packaging questions

Ken Brown kbrown@cornell.edu
Sun Jun 16 11:38:00 GMT 2013

On 6/15/2013 8:37 AM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> It's easy enough to provide bundle packages and the normal user would
> never need to look at the individual distribution packages.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the need for bundle 
packages.  Take the example of biber.  I had to build a bunch of perl-* 
packages, and cygport figured out the dependencies among them and the 
dependencies of biber.  A user who installs biber automatically gets the 
necessary Perl modules without ever having to look at them in the 
chooser.  How would a bundle make this easier?

A few of the perl-* packages are needed for building biber but not for 
using it.  I took care of these by setting DEPEND in the .cygport files. 
  So people who want to replicate the build will need to select the 
necessary packages [listed by cygport] in the chooser.  A bundle would 
admittedly make this easier.

But there's nothing special about Perl modules here.  You always have to 
worry about build dependencies when you build a package from source. 
And we are not yet at the point where we are asking maintainers (or 
cygport) to create build-dependency packages.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list