Currently, there are three dominant -src packaging standards. 1. As detailed on http://cygwin.com/setup.html#package_contents foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus: foo-VER[-REL]/ foo-VER[-REL]/source files foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs foo-VER[-REL]/subdirs/source files foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES foo-VER[-REL]/CYGWIN-PATCHES/the-patch (*)
(*) already applied to the source tree. Use this to REVERT to the "pristine" source. 2. packages which have cygwin-adapted source maintained in a cygwin-hosted CVS repository (e.g. gcc, cygwin itself, binutils, make, a few others). foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus: foo[-VER[-REL]]/ foo[-VER[-REL]]/source files foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs foo[-VER[-REL]]/subdirs/source files In this scheme, there is no "cygwin patch" -- the cygwin version is basically a fork. If you want to know how the cygwin-specific source differs from the "official" version, you must get both sources and do the diff yourself. 3. A method hashed out on the cygwin-apps list last november: patches to vendor source trees - discussion: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00046.html -src package standard: proposal #5 and #5a: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-11/msg00490.html foo-VER-REL-src.tar.bz2 unpacks thus: foo-VER.tar.[bz2|gz] -- original source code foo-VER-REL.patch -- the cygwinization patch foo-VER-REL.sh -- a script to drive the whole unpack/patch/configure/build/re-package procedure. As to why the .gz(or.bz2) compressed "original source code" tarball is included inside an .bz2 -src package, when the internal tarball can't really be compressed further: it's the original. If I ungzip it, and then bzip it, then it isn't the original version EXACTLY as distributed by the upstream folks... Hope that helps explain it. --Chuck Lapo Luchini wrote: > Why the wget-1.8.1-1-src.tar.bz2 package does contain wget-1.8.1.tar.gz > ? > This is pretty peculiar and mroeover defeats any additional compression > .bz2 could have versus .gz (compressed data is uncompressable even if it > could be comperssed better with another compressor ^_^)? > > Just for curiosity =) > > BTW: in creating UPX package it'll have the strange erquirement that UPX > source package needs also UCL source package (the installed binary isn't > enough). > Can that precedence be used, maybe documenting it in the > Cygwin-doc/upx-...-1.txt o I shoul better include the sources needed to > compile it also in UPC src directory to need only UCL library installed > only? > > -- > Lapo 'Raist' Luchini > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) > http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796) > > >
