[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: get the project officially started

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:11:57 -0500, James Mastros wrote:

>On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:38:11AM -0700, Mark Paulus wrote:
>> On the other hand, I do have an issue that I would like to see 
>> resolved fairly quickly.  It seems to me that the w32 designation
>> is a bit broad or limited, depending on which side of the handle
>> you are looking at it from.  
>I simply think it's a bit nonstandard, and that win32 would be better.  But
>that's a whole nother can of worms.
>> And, to me, there is a pretty large difference between a cygwin
>> port of debian packages, and a native Wintel port, both of which
>> could qualify for w32.  
>Right.  Personaly, I'd tend to say that a cygwin port of a package should be
>in architecture win32-i386, and depend on libcygwin.  A native port should
>be in architecture win32-i386, and should not depend on libcygwin.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here:  Every package that
is to be ported/compiled would get an architecture extension of ? (w32 maybe),
and then every package description for dpkg/dselect/apt would have to be
updated with a proper dependency.  But, what differentiates the cygwin
dependent file (dpkg_1.9.18_w32.deb) from the native wintel file
(dpkg_1.9.18_???.deb), so that apt knows which one to grab for my
current environment??  (Sorry to take this discussion out of the ozone,
and down to the road, but my rubber is down there, and I like to keep it

>(Acatualy, I'd tend to say that they should both be in architecture i386,
>and the native port should depend on libkernel32, but now we're getting a
>little wierd.)

One small problem with this dependency.  cygwin1.dll should depend on 
libkernel32.dll, which means that all cygwin dependencies would also be 
fulfilled in this case.....

>> Basically, we need more granularity in our package naming conventions,
>> it seems to me.
>Debianites in general have been worrying about that for quite a bit, since
>the Hurd port made i386 ambiguous.
>    -=- James Mastros
>God has both Tea and No Tea.	-=- SLM
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-win32-request@lists.debian.org
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: