On 05/07/2025 15:16, Andrew Schulman via Cygwin-apps wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 22:06:45 +0100, Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps wrote:
Having developers build executable packages locally and then upload them
doesn't really meet contemporary standards.
Given my druthers, I'd just disable sftp package uploads right now, and
make you all use the janky "build service" I hacked together in a few
spare weekends.
Are there any Cygwin packages that aren't fully cygport-scriptable yet? For
example, are there any that rely on (free) software not yet available in
Cygwin for their builds? If so, then they'll need to keep being built locally
and manully uploaded.
So, to be clear, the answer is "yes" to the first part, and "no" to the
second part.
Instances of the first case that I'm aware of are:
* all(?) of Jari Aalto's packages use g-b-s for build and
packaging.(This is probably supportable with some sort of extension to
declare the build-requires)
* mintty assembles the package archives itself and uploads those along
with a set of pre-written hint files. (I'm trying to work with Thomas
to make this a bit more like regular usage)
I don't think there are any instances of the second case, and such a
thing would probably be unacceptable as a package.
