This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 8/6/2010 11:52 PM, Chris Sutcliffe wrote: > I wish to maintain rtorrent and the additional libraries it requires > that are not currently part of the Cygwin distribution: [snip] > All these packages have been approved by the Fedora project, but as > far as I can tell have not been included as part of the official > Fedora distribution. However, it is part of Debian's stable packages > (lenny). As a result, I don't believe it needs to be voted on. > > I would appreciate it if someone could give the packaging a once over. libsigc++-2.0-2.2.8-1: I got this during configure: configure: WARNING: unrecognized options: --disable-demos, --disable-examples I guess those options are added as part of the gtkmm cygclass, so there's not much you can do about it. Also, this is bad bad bad: $ tar tjf libsigc++2.0_0-2.2.8-1.tar.bz2 usr/bin/cygsigc-2.0-0.dll usr/share/doc/Cygwin/ usr/share/doc/Cygwin/libsigc++2.0.README usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/ usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/AUTHORS usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/ChangeLog usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/COPYING usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/NEWS usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/README usr/share/doc/libsigc++2.0/TODO What happens when you want to install both libsigc++2.0_0 and libsigc++2.0_1? (*) DLL packages should never contain anything except the dll all by itself. (*) I know, an upstream ABI change would *also* most likely be marked by a bump in the X.Y version number, so it would be "libsigc++2.2_1" or something. But sadly, we sometimes have to change the ABI of libraries on cygwin, without any similar shift upstream. It's rare, but it does happen: the 64bit off_t switch circa cygwin-1.5; repeated issues with libncurses, etc. I know you're trying to follow Yaakov's advice to "not have a base package that contains nothing but documentation". Personally, I don't see the problem with doing that, but IMO it's a maintainer decision (ie. yours). So, if you don't want to put these docs in libsigc++2.0-2.2.8-1 and you really should NOT put them in libsigc++2.0_0-2.2.8-1 Then you can either stick 'em in libsigc++2.0-doc-2.2.8-1 with all the voluminous stack of API docu, OR...create a separate package just for these files, that ISN'T the "base" package. Since it contains the licensing information along with some basic docu, perhaps: libsigc++2.0-lic-2.2.8-1 ? (I stole the idea from the recent mingw packages over at mingw.org) Also, I don't really see the need to put the ENTIRE file list in the Cygwin README (and your build instructions are cut-n-pasto). The attached implement all of these suggestions. But the port builds fine from source both with and without my modifications. Will follow up on libtorrent and rtorrent in separate messages. -- Chuck
Attachment:
libsigc++2.0-2.2.8-1.cygport.lzma
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
libsigc++2.0-2.2.8-1.cygwin.patch.lzma
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |