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: <0a0c01c174c6$a5ec2db0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Paul Garceau" <pgarceau AT qwest DOT net>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <03f501c1732c$21f2a570$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <3BFE742C DOT 15281 DOT 914FBD AT localhost>
Subject: Re: Remove cinstall src directory from snapshots
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 20:01:42 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2001 09:01:36.0739 (UTC) FILETIME=[9F42DB30:01C174C6]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul G." <pgarceau AT qwest DOT net>
> > >I don't think so, there's no reason that the source for utils isn't
> > >cygwin-1.5.3-1-src.tar.bz2.
> >
> > I thought of that but then I'd have to release a version of cygwin
sources
> > with winsup/utils that  had no relationship to the net release.
Maybe that's
> > not a problem.  You don't think we'd have people trying to build
cygwin itself
> > from these sources?

...

> Whether it was due to inexperience with building setup.exe or due to
something else, I ended up resorting to a
> complete rebuild of cygwin1.dll before setup.exe would even begin to
link properly (second run).  It still failed on second
> run.  By that point, however, I had a very good idea of what was
needed before a so-called "clean" build of Setup.exe could
> be generated.

Hmm, do you have those logs by any chance? 'All' setup.exe needs is
w32api, mingw, zlib and libbz2

> So, to address the query cgf presented, the possibility is definitely
there that someone may attempt to rebuild all
> of Cygwin from nothing but the winsup/utils.  We already know that
Setup.exe has a certain dependency, in its current
> form, on cygwin1.dll as well as several other utilities (bash, bz2,
zlib, etc.) that may or may not be included as part of a
> winsup/utils source collection.

Actually, setup.exe is a mingw app, not a cygwin app, so having no
cygwin source should be fine.

Anyway, I'm personally in favour of pointing folk at CVS, at least for
the immediate future, as its
a) simple for us.
b) GPL compliant (folk who get the binary can get the source at the same
time)
c) can be changed in the future with no ill effect.

And unlike cygwin, there's little reason for folk to want a custom
version of setup. Indeed, if they have such, then chances are they have
the nounce to manage the source themselves.

Rob