This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Packaging software built with cygwin
Technically, the ideal solution would be to link against a set
of static libraries.
I believe this would require some significant work to make it possible.
OK, it feels like we're getting into a circular
argument. I am not insisting that anyone do
any particular thing to Cygwin. My intention
is to raise a perspective on a potential use
of Cygwin which may or may not be desirable,
feasible, popular or supported by the Cygwin
Also, the most experienced Cygwin coders won't be that interested,
because they *like* Cygwin-the-enviroment, as opposed to
Fair enough, I like using Cygwin-the-environment, but
feel restricted in terms of deploying binaries into
a non-cygwin environment. Even though the Cygwin
installation procedure has been greatly enhanced and
streamlined, in my opinion Cygwin is too heavy-weight for
an average computer user to install and administer.
So, if this is outside the scope of what Cygwin is
for, then that is a reasonable answer... I'm finding
mingw is working quite well (perhaps, the best of both
worlds) but would prefer to keep my code clean (POSIX)
rather than infected with extraneous win32 calls...
You can - they just can't use the unix APIs.
I use Cygwin for all my compilation needs, Cygwin-linked, or native Win32.
So rather than upsetting the Cygwin faithful, would
it be better to expand the support POSIX subset for
mingw, rather than making Cygwin an easily managed
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html