Any current plans for an SDL package?

[unknown_kev_cat@hotmail.com]

Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Larry Hall wrote:
> 
> 
>>At 04:40 PM 11/23/2003, unknown_kev_cat@hotmail.com you wrote:
>>
>>>I could also try to compile a Cygwin binary version of the
>>>library, but that would be at least slightly harder.
>>
>>This would be a true Cygwin package so I don't see a reason
>>it couldn't be included in setup if it passes successfully
>>through the ITP stage.
> 
> 
> Sure, if he wants to become a maintainer. He seemed to wrote
> the opposite in his first e-mail:
> 
> "If nobody plans on creating such a package i may be able to,
> however i warn you now: i do not intend on become a cygwin
> package maintaner."
> 
> You don't want another person who submits a package and doesn't
> maintain it. The Links package is a good example.
> 
Yes i will not be able to maintain it, however i doubt that it would be 
too very hard to find a maintainer, as the packages are already 
maintained for compiling under windows, so all that would actually be 
nessisary is to compile it for cygwin after each new release. The key is 
finding any header files that are needed that you cannot get through 
cygwin. (Not a big deal, but this has been the true cause of many a 
message posted to this list regarding SDL.)



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/