ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2000/07/11/12:59:20

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
From: michael-ring AT t-online DOT de (Michael Ring)
To: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Cc: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: I would like to release a new version of bzip2, any objections ?
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:59:52 +0200
Message-ID: <kdkmmscaojpcof13bhfbq8mh03g6jceqka@4ax.com>
References: <d4emmssvrkjlpkng79fi422jovk85akol2 AT 4ax DOT com> <396B50A7 DOT EF3AAF00 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <396B50A7.EF3AAF00@ece.gatech.edu>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: 320032306730-0001 AT t-dialin DOT net
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id MAA02131

On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:51:51 -0400, you wrote:

>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...
>

Yes, please! I am doing all this to get latest in sync with my
rpm-development. If I can include .dll's that's 1 big step closer to
my personal goal. 

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

Yes, they should be static, rpm should also be static but all the rest
should be linked dynamic.

>
>--Chuck
>

Michael

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019