Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3E4538CA.8000902@yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 08 Feb 2003 12:05:14 -0500
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: So, *should* I go back to distributing the mingw/w32api sources
	in the cygwin source tarball?
References:	<20030208164444 DOT GA8989 AT redhat DOT com>

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> The subject says it all.  If I don't distribute the mingw and w32api
> sources, I stand the chance of releasing a version of the sources that
> won't build until the next release of mingw or w32api.  I don't want to
> have to go through the effort of coordinating with Earnie every time I
> release cygwin so the alternative is to go back to including the mingw
> and w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball.
> 
> I don't like the thought of duplication here but I guess I've finally
> grown weary of the bug reports from people who can't build from the
> sources available via tarball.
> 

I'm not going to say much about it other than, I empathize with you. 
Perhaps a symlink to the installed versions would do?

Earnie.

- Raw text -