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
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 12:12:56 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
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?
Message-ID: <20030208171256.GC9272@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20030208164444 DOT GA8989 AT redhat DOT com> <3E4538CA DOT 8000902 AT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3E4538CA.8000902@yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i

On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 12:05:14PM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>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?

I forgot to mention that I changed the top-level configury so that
w32api is no longer absolutely required.  So, there is no need for
a symlink anymore (I hope).  Or, rather, if there is, I'll fix it.

That doesn't stop the inevitable version skew, though, when something
gets fixed in w32api and cygwin relies on it.

cgf