ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/09/17/19:56:39

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: <3BA68DB0.20308@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 19:56:32 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010713
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: [RFD] ncurses update
References: <3BA3A5F4 DOT 8010100 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010917182915 DOT C10081 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3BA63755 DOT 9040406 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010917210951 DOT H10081 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>

Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 01:48:05PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 03:03:16PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>>This is an ABI change, requiring the DLL number to be bumped, and apps 
>>>>to be recompiled. (e.g. we now have cygncurses6.dll, etc)
>>>Somehow I don't like the `6' here for a ncurses-5.2 version but
>>>if we can't avoid that...
>>Well, remember that library version != package version, esp. according 
>>to the libtool guys.  It's only a misunderstanding of this 
> Oerks, it's ok.  I shouldn't have complained...

Yeah, but now my reasoning is in the archives, I can point people to 
msgXXXXX when questions (inevitably) arise.

>>>>b) the new libncurses5 package?  (should I just put the old DLLs inside 
>>>>ncurses-5.2-6 package?  should the new DLL's themselves be split from 
>>>>the ncurses package and put in libncurses6 package?)  What about the 
>>>>source code naming difference (libncurses5 != ncurses)?
>>>Splitting is ok but what about just naming the file `ncurses5-5.2-1'?
>>>The package would be nearer to the other ncurses package in setup's
>>>package dialog.
>>No objections here -- but Red Hat doesn't do it that way (nor does any 
>>other RPM-based distro).  Don't we want to be like Red Hat?

Also, then you'd have "ncurses5" and "ncurses6" -- which contain just 
the dll's, along with "ncurses" which contains the executables and man 
pages.  That just doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

libncursesX + ncurses makes more sense, IMO.  (Besides, once categories 
are working, these will all be grouped in some "system libraries" 
category which is a much smaller list than the full list of pacakges...)

> I can't see a reason to follow like sheeps.  We have our own
> packaging scheme which we decide about.  Each Linux distro
> uses a different layout and we don't even have a Linux distro...


I'm thinking of the following (Chris, will the setup.ini generator 
script be able to figure this out?:)


libncurses5-5.2-1-src.tar.bz2 just contains a single file:
which sez "go get ncurses-5.2-5-src.tar.gz"

libncurses6-5.2-1-src.tar.bz2 just contains a single file:
which sez "go get ncurses-5.2-6-src.tar.bz2"

I want to put the lib* versions into subdirs of ncurses, because they 
come from the same "true" source.  However, terminfo is an actual fork, 
so it gets its own toplevel dir.



- Raw text -

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