Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/11/02/03:21:39
Robert Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-11-02 at 18:52, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>stuff "properly"). Translating that into a setup-compatible tarball
>>will take some work; IMO it'd be better to have a (mostly) stable
>>setup.exe *before* asking the cygwin-xfree folks to embark on that task.
> Oh, the other point: There's no need for the tarballs to change if they
> current extract into the correct location. (/ IIRC)
Well, the *names* need to change. Currently, they are named cryptically
like "Xbin.tgz" and "Xf100.tgz" and "Xetc.tgz". No version numbers --
and the source package is monolithic, even though there are many
"binary" packages. It'll probably be necessary to have "fake" src
packages (see libncurses5-X.Y-Z-src.tar.bz2) for most of these, and then
just one "real" src package.
Also, it is unclear whether the current division into these specific
separate binary tarballs is the appropriate division for official
setup.exe-style packages -- although keeping the current divisions would
be the easiest thing to do.
My point: work is needed, and decisions must be made. And that ought to
wait until after the new setup is unleashed and stabilized -- but that's
what you said in the other message, anyway. So we agree.
- Raw text -