This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: cyclical dependencies in setup.ini?
On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 09:41:59PM -0800, Edward S. Peschko wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 12:04:21AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>or, if someone had a script which did a complete build of cygwin from
>source, the dependencies would be listed there...
Why would there be such a thing? Cygwin isn't released all at once. It
is updated in piecemeal fashion.
>>I guess it isn't obvious that setup's dependencies have nothing to do
>>with what it takes to build a package. For instance, cygwin relies on
>>g++ to build. Do you see g++ listed as a dependency? Nope. It's not
>>unreasonable to expect that setup might be able to encapsulate this
>>information but no one has ever implemented it. Some package managers
>>have a "build-depends" tag. setup.ini doesn't have that.
>
>its what I would expect. It would be useful.
It wouldn't be all that useful for me as a package maintainer. Once you
have things set up they tend to remain pretty stable. I don't build
the whole cygwin distribution. I just build the pieces I maintain and,
since I'm pretty familair with the pieces I maintain, I don't need
the build-depends, especially since setup.exe keeps my system up-to-date
with whatever I require.
I also know that build-depends is a real headache for Red Hat package
maintainers so I'm not in a hurry to foist that extra bookkeeping
headache on cygwin maintainers. It's moderate effort for small
gain given that there are other more important things that could
be done with and to setup.exe.
However, if you are building the whole package, then why not just
download... the whole package?
>> (And here is where Robert steps in to say that build-depends is actually
>> recognized by setup.exe's parser...)
>>
>> >ps - I'm looking at CVS right now, and it looks like there are
>> >configure/makefiles common to all of winsup but not part of any given
>> >package. Is it possible to build all the sub-packages separately?
>>
>> "configure/makefiles common to all of winsup"? Huh?
>>
>> Why would we put some things in CVS and leave the rest to the
>> imagination?
>
>winsup is split into several directories:
>
>mingw
>w32api
>maint
>utils
>cygserver
>cygwin
>
>etc.
>
>I'm assuming that these correspond to the -src.tar.bz2 pcakages inside
>of the repository, and each one of these has . However there are
>makefiles which coordinate the build, above these directories (at level
>winsup). I'm assuming that these aren't part of any package that is
>distributed. I could be wrong.
Could be, and are. There is no need to speculate when simple inspection
of the source tarballs and of the CVS repository would show you how
things are laid out. There is no need to assume that things are broken
rather than working.
>> If you're missing something, and you want help, then explain exactly
>> what you are missing, if you are expecting help.
>
>what I'd like to do is build a complete cygwin from start to end, from
>numbered releases (-src.tar.bz2 files), with as few binary dependencies
>as possible (which looks like it means just g++ and gmake).
>
>what I'm missing is a list of dependencies in which to do this. I can
>go through the process and make a list by trial and error, but I'd
>rather had hoped that someone had done the groundwork so I didn't need
>to reinvent the wheel.
Yeah. I got that. You are basically on your own there.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/