This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: experimental texmf packages
"Robert Collins" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Build environments to recreate a -src package need
> a) pristine source TARBALL.
> b) patch for current -x version
> c) extracted and patched working dir.
> the pre-patch -src requirement has been. See
> http://www.cygwin.com/setup.html. No mention of a prepatched source
> tarball is made at all.
Ah, ok. I'm just used to those, as I'm rebuilding from available
patched -src packages if possible.
Do we already have -src packages that adhere to this new convention?
If it's not too late, it would be very nice if they could be
distinguished from the old, prepatched -src packages, by using a
different naming convention, ie foo-1.1-cyg.tar.gz?
> > mv foo-1.1 foo-1.1-1
> Not sure why you're bothering to rename this.
My bad, I was thinking of tarring up the patched src tarball.
> do porting. So the point is that if RPM had been contributed, and you
> maintain *just that one package* as an official package
Ok, but I had conflicting interest: I needed all packages now to
provide lilypond, and couldn't maintain them all for cygwin. Also, I
assumed, had an rpm or other port caught on, the mirroring at cygnus
would have worked.
> That hasn't changed - mingw doesn't aim for posix support.
> BTW: can you freshed up your postremove patch? I'd like that to be
> included in setup.
Yes, will do.
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <email@example.com> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html