docs: improve package maintainer instructions

Eric Blake
Mon Aug 4 19:28:00 GMT 2014

On 08/04/2014 03:14 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> I'm fine with the changes, barring Yaakov's nits.

I fixed those.

> However, while we're at it shouldn't we change from "cygport is the
> accepted way to make Cygwin packages" to "cygport is the required way to
> make new Cygwin packages and the (strongly) recommended way for package
> updates"?  I for one think it's time to switch to a single packaging
> method.  After all, you don't have rpm packages in Debian or apt
> packages in Fedora.  This will also greatly simplify to set up an
> automated build system for Cygwin packages at one point.

Agreed; so here's what I added in before pushing my patch:

@@ -283,9 +288,12 @@ etc...
   <li>Ensure that your package handles being installed on binary and
text mounts correctly. </li>

-<p>While you could make a package satisfying these requirements by
hand, the
-accepted way to make Cygwin packages is using the cygport tool, which
-automatically handles most of the above issues for you.</p>
+<p>While older packages exist which satisfy these requirements by hand, the
+only accepted way to make a new Cygwin package is using the cygport
tool, which
+automatically handles most of the above issues for you.  It is also
+strongly recommended to convert existing packages to cygport when
+updating them; ask on the <tt>cygwin-apps</tt> list if you need help
+converting an existing package to use cygport.</p>

 <h2><a id="making_srcpackage" name="making_srcpackage">Making a package
with cygport</a></h2>

Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 539 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list