[...] Well, beside the fact that you don't provide a patch to restore the original source archive. This is the main (?) reason to provide the patch, it is there to get back the official sources.
Grr @!%$, forgot to put it into the source archive again :) Fixed.
The original source archive contains a Makefile, which you removed.
No, mine doesn't. The original download site for psutils seems to be down for the past few days, so I got the source from a mirror. It did not contain a file named Makefile. Does your's?
Yes, it does ;-). I got the sources from: <http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/psutils.html>, there I found psutils_1.17.orig.tar.gz.
BTW, My first release of the source package contained a Makefile which I removed, because *you* (spotlight on :-) said it was *not* in the original source.
That was a misunderstanding, as "my" unpatched sources had a Makefile (that was different from your Makefile) I thought you overwrote it.
It is the correct way.You also added the CYGWIN-PATCHES dir (This is good, but it's not in the original sources.
http://cygwin.com/setup.html told me to. Isn't this the usual way to include Cygwin-specific stuff?
I attached a patch that IMHO does it right. I also "modified" the already present $(prefix) variable that you now can do:
Looks good. I modified the Makefile.unix and README accordingly.
Fine, :-) I'll have a look later today. Can you give me a link where you found "your" original psutils_1.17 sources.
Bye Volker
-- PGP/GPG key (ID: 0x9F8A785D) available from wwwkeys.de.pgp.net key-fingerprint 550D F17E B082 A3E9 F913 9E53 3D35 C9BA 9F8A 785D
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature