> > >I was following method one for packaging the sources - it seemed to >me, that the preferred place to store the patch is the root and not >CYGWIN-PATCHES. This patch is actually used ONLY to remove the >CYGWIN-PATCHES dir and its contents. I haven't done any cygwin >specific changes. > You're right since the last time I did a "method 1" package the suggestions did change... and I didn't notice it.
>It was easier for me to package it this way :) If method two is >preferred I'll repackage the source that way. > Originally I was for method 1 but then Charles Wilson (if I remember well) convinced me that method two can be better in the way that it uses original package exactly as is and the patch is external and IMHO easier to read. This added to the fact that having a script that creates automatically source and binary packages simplifies instructions to rebuild it in the README and facilitates following versions, once the .sh is already "customized" for the package and rarely needs adjusting (as it reads the version and release from its name itself). But as I said this is entirely a personal preference, method one is perfectly OK and used by many cygwin developers. >LL> Are you italian? Uhm.. form the email seems not. >Nope :) I work/live in Italy though :) > Then we're sort of colleagues (or maybe opponent) as one of my addresses is [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0=) -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
