On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:58:56AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Oct 22 22:49, Balaji wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> > On Oct 17 10:17, Balaji wrote: >> [...] >> >> This being my first attempt at trying to possibly maintain a Cygwin >> >> package, I want make sure I'm doing the right thing. One odd thing is >> >> that all of the source code and Makefile are in the patch file. Also, >> >> am I free to convert the package to cygport/ditch the shell script >> >> etc. - I understand all that may typically be the maintainer's choice? >> >> Advance thanks for any advice from you seasoned veterans. >> > >> > Porting a package to cygport is highly appreciated, no worries. And of >> > course you are free to pack it in a cleaner fashion than the existing >> > package. >> >> One other question - I remember there was some discussion about noarch >> packages a while ago. Are there any rules for/against making something >> a noarch package. And the associated pros/cons - both from a >> maintainer and user perspective? > >Noarch packages are fine, but the packaging mechanism doesn't support >them the same way as in Linux distros. They still have to show up >twice, once in the 32 and once in the 64 bit release area.
i.e., just like Linux distros do. cgf
