This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: strange source packaging?
Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> From my point of view, when I download the source rpm for a package, I
> always find it rather annoying that I have to apply patches by hand.
Well, for rpm's, you can always do:
rpm -bp <specfile>
which will unpack the tarball and apply the various patches. Kinda like
'foo-VER-REL.sh prep' in style 3.
> I'd
> rather just have the latest, greatest version of things extracted into
> a directory where I can type "configure/make" without any extra thinking
> involved.
Well, yeah -- but both style 1 and style 2 presuppose that the cygwin
chagnes have already been applied. Only style 3 ships the unpatched
source. Style 1 just happens to include a "reveral patch" inside the
tarball; that's the main difference between it and style 2.
However, as I recall, the main arguments (way back when) for including
the reversal patch were basically a compromise between "I wanna unpack
and GO" and "but where's the pristine source?". The "where's the
pristine source" crowd (me, Robert, etc) have style 3, if we REALLY care.
So, there's an argument for (!1),2,3...
> My 1c. Now back to this resurrected discusion...
Sigh.
--Chuck