This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Global 32/64 bit collision issues
- From: Karl M <karlm30 at hotmail dot com>
- To: "cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com" <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 06:39:01 -0700
- Subject: RE: Global 32/64 bit collision issues
- References: <20130523084435 dot GB13513 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51A2C50A dot 5090405 at users dot sourceforge dot net>,<20130527100409 dot GD2483 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
>>> But what about cygserver? Without cygserver there's no XSI IPC.
>>> Even if we don't change the service names on a general basis,
>>> shouldn't cygserver at least be available in parallel, using
>>> different service names?
>>
>> IMO yes.
>
> I guessed.
>
> I'm kind of cringing when thinking of a naming convention for the 64 bit
> packages. Not only that it looks weird in the service list:
>
> cron64
> clamd64
> sshd
> cygserver64
>
> it's also a nuisance when starting/stopping the service. You now longer
> start the service, you start the service64, even if you don't have a 32
> bit installation on that machine. ANybody having a *good* idea for a
> naming convention?
>
> In the end, we want users to have only one installation, either 32 bit
> or 64 bit, and the latter should be preferred on 64 bit machines anyway.
> So I'm still wondering if we really should bother at all. The only
> "users" running both installations in parallel are maintainers and
> Cygwin devs, isn't it? And those, I trust, know what they are doing.
> Is that too simple?
>
How about using an environment variable like CYGWIN32 and CYGWIN64 or CYGWIN32SUFFIX and CYGWIN64SUFFIX... and if they are defined they are used to adjust the corresponding default names by the scripts.
They could be created by setup if the user selects a side by side option during installation, or just manually set by the user.
Most folks would not need either defined. And they only set default names for the services etc.
...Karl