Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<396B50A7.EF3AAF00@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:51:51 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Michael Ring <michael-ring AT t-online DOT de>
CC:	cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: I would like to release a new version of bzip2, any objections ?
References:	<d4emmssvrkjlpkng79fi422jovk85akol2 AT 4ax DOT com>

Please do. The omission of libbz2.a is the reason bzip is included on
CygUtils. I wasn't sure who the maintainer of the bzip package was, so I
never got around to investigating and trying to get a complete package
into latest.

FWIW, libbz2.a is useful for building tar with the bzip patch.

RFC: I think that libbz2 is a purely functional interface, so it should
not be too hard to create libbz2.dll. gcc -shared might make this a snap
to do, but you'll need an ld.exe with very recent patches. I can send
you a binary if you need it -- I don't think my binutils patches from
last Friday have been pushed into CVS yet...

(Is providing libbz2.dll a good idea? Even if provided, IMO bzip2.exe
and bunzip2.exe should be built using -static)

--Chuck

Michael Ring wrote:
> 
> The bzip2 package is currently delivered without the libbz2.a and
> without the man-page.
> 
> I would like to update the package to bzip2-1.0.1 with everything
> included.
> 
> Any objections?
> 
> Michael

- Raw text -