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

Re: [Dev-C++] Compiling cygwin



> That will be a BIG change for any tools that are not "cygwin-native".  If
> you are going to make that a goal, why not just convert the tools to
> cygwin?

Being a Cygwin user, I am convinced Cygwin installer should not be used.

This would confuse users who would have the choice between three 
distributions. Let's take the example of Apache. A user would have the choice 
between :
- Apache from Cygwin installer,
- Native Windows Apache,
- W32/Debian Apache.

Cygwin installer and dpkg have no knowledge of each other. So what happens if 
you install Cygwin Apache + W32/Debian apache by error during an upgrade? It 
may create a conflict, which will convince a normal user to drop BOTH Cygwin 
and W32/Debian.

Do you think this would be possible to follow these steps:
1) Port dpkg to Windows using a static POSIX emulation layer.
2) Create a cygwin.deb package for W32/Windows. This probably means compiling 
Cygwin under mingw, right?
2) Afterwards, we can start building W32/Debian packages with whatever 
dependency we want. Cygwin or non-Cygwin. This will give us more freedom.

> Why?  The only registry manipulation that cygwin does is for the mount
> table.  The "mount" command does this very well.

IApache 2.0 threads have been redesigned for more portability. So why should I 
use it under Cygwin? If we do not find a way to provide W32/Debian packages 
for important software (Apache, Python, Tcl, etc..) not linked agains Cygwin, 
people ***may*** turn to native Windows executables.

What do you think of this in technical terms?
Can 1) 2) and 3) be done?

Thanks for this great project,
Best regards,
Jean-Michel POURE


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-win32-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: