So, *should* I go back to distributing the mingw/w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball?

Christopher Faylor
Sat Feb 8 16:43:00 GMT 2003

The subject says it all.  If I don't distribute the mingw and w32api
sources, I stand the chance of releasing a version of the sources that
won't build until the next release of mingw or w32api.  I don't want to
have to go through the effort of coordinating with Earnie every time I
release cygwin so the alternative is to go back to including the mingw
and w32api sources in the cygwin source tarball.

I don't like the thought of duplication here but I guess I've finally
grown weary of the bug reports from people who can't build from the
sources available via tarball.

I could include a top-level readme file in the source directory saying
that the w32api and mingw directories are just snapshots and are not
intended for installation.  Or, I could install up a top-level readme
that says "Don't be a schmuck.  Use CVS."  Or, I could just keep pointing
at the FAQ and refining it as we go along.

So, which is the "meanest" alternative here?  I honestly don't know and
am willing to go with whatever people suggest.

Btw, please don't cc this thread to the cygwin mailing list.  I sent it
here for a reason.  I don't want to open up discussion to everybody in
the world.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list