RE: [Dev-C++] Compiling cygwin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm.poure@freesurf.fr]
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 3:39 AM
> > 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.
So help out with the dpkg integration for setup. I've been quite vocal
about this in the past on the setup development list(s) (used to be
cygwin-developers, now cygwin-apps).
> Do you think this would be possible to follow these steps:
> 1) Port dpkg to Windows using a static POSIX emulation layer.
Posibly pw32. Msys --IS-- cygwin. (Ok, was, sure...). Cygwin ain't
static, and cannot easily be.
> 2) Create a cygwin.deb package for W32/Windows. This probably
> means compiling
> Cygwin under mingw, right?
Cygwin always compiles under mingw - it's a native binary.
> 2) Afterwards, we can start building W32/Debian packages with
> whatever
> dependency we want. Cygwin or non-Cygwin. This will give us
> more freedom.
You can do that now. Cygwin setup.exe installs win32 and cygwin binaries
along with perl/python scripts etc. etc.
> > 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.
If it's not linked to Cygwin it _is_ a native Window executable. Or did
I parse your paragraph wrongly. Anyway, /proc/registry allows full read
access to the registry, and may allow write access soon.
> What do you think of this in technical terms?
> Can 1) 2) and 3) be done?
1) will be hard, and will be duplication of effort. (You will -still-
have to solve the file replacement issue, as well as new porting
challenges).
2) Is trivial. It's what cygwin is today, just repackaged.
3) You can do that now. I don't see what 1) gains you , except a
headache.
Rob
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-win32-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: