This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: Packaging software built with cygwin

Nigel Stewart & Fiona Smith wrote:
>> I would suggest that, if it is desired to promote the development of
>> applications on the Cygwin platform, serious consideration be made
>> to making it as simple as possible to install only those portions of
>> Cygwin that the application requires. This means just the necessary
>> DLLs, without all of the interactive use baggage. Right now, that's
>> nearly impossible.

If someone wishes to volunteer to work towards that...

> Technically, the ideal solution would be to link against a set
> of static libraries.  Therefore requiring no extra install at
> all.  No DLL hell, no tech support, no "Cygwin is the problem"
> perception.

I believe this would require some significant work to make it possible.

> However, is it feasible for the Cygwin project to
> make this exception for the sake of utility?

If you are talking about making cygwin static-capable - see above - lots of
work. Also, the most experienced Cygwin coders won't be that interested,
because they *like* Cygwin-the-enviroment, as opposed to

Also, there is the side benefit that it is *much* easier to spot GPL
violations this way.

> This is the same reason I find myself experimenting with
> mingw, I would like to use Cygwin as the devel platform
> and target native binaries, or at least non Cygwin-DLL
> dependent binaries...

You can - they just can't use the unix APIs.
I use Cygwin for all my compilation needs, Cygwin-linked, or native Win32.


Unsubscribe info:
Bug reporting:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]