Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
What should package maintainers be doing about this? I maintain the cmake package, and although I am subscribed to this list, I rarely follow it closely. I post updates to cmake, but that is about it. However, I just noticed this thread. Should package maintainers being building stuff for 1.5.0? If so, are there instructions for installing 1.5.0? Thanks. -Bill
Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
On 2003.07.17 09:16, Charles Wilson wrote: 1) already recompiled for 1.5.0 2) non-binary 3) binary, but not for new use (e.g. could be recompiled, but why?) 4) empty compatibility packages (newlib-man, texmf?) 5) need to be recompiled 1.5.0 NEED TO BE RECOMPILED FOR 1.5.0 --- [...] docbook-xml42 docbook-xsl Please move both docbook-xml42 and docbook-xsl to #2. They are not compiled... Thanks. -- +---+ | Marcel Telka e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |homepage: http://telka.sk/ | |jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +---+
Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 03:16:41AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: Well, you can cross these off your list... bzip2 + libbz2_1 gdbm + libgdbm-devel, libgdbm3 Note that the following do not have any compiled portions, and are therefore ready for 1.5.0 autoconf automake libtool autoconf-devel automake-devel keychain BTW, I think you *should* include the lower namespaces. Even though some will NOT be ported to 1.5.0. For instance, libbz2_0 contains /usr/bin/cygbz21.0.dll. But, cygbz21.0.dll is provided only for backwards compatibility for any programs that might be around to use it. However, there is no import library for it. Therefore, any NEWly compiled apps that link against -lbz2 will use /usr/lib/libbz2.dll.a which points to cygbz2_1.dll. Thus, I updated cygbz2_1.dll (libbz2_1 package) but not cygbz21.0.dll (libbz2_0 package). So, there are really five classes of packages: 1) already recompiled for 1.5.0 2) non-binary 3) binary, but not for new use (e.g. could be recompiled, but why?) 4) empty compatibility packages (newlib-man, texmf?) 5) need to be recompiled 1.5.0 Of these 5 classes, only those packages in #5 need anything done. Everything else is fine. So, for instance, ncurses ncurses-demo libncurses7 libncurses-devel are all #1's. But libncurses6 libncurses5 are both #3's. And, base-files is #2, while cvs is #5. Here's my first cut at a list. I know I've probably miscategorized some things, but I tried to err on the side of putting stuff into #5 (recompile me now!) -- but we want #5 to get real small :-) I can help: Move crypt to category 1 and regex to category 3. Crypt is not using any call which would change due to 1.5.0. The package would be 100% identical on a binary level. Regex is the POSIX regex functionality which is only kept for backward compatibility. The POSIX regex functionality is a Cygwin builtin since roughly french revolution (well, 1.3.1 or so). I, for one, would remove the regex package entirely from the distro. There's no package in the distro using it and the period in which Cygwin had no POSIX regex and the regex package provided a shared lib was pretty small. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.
Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Charles Wilson wrote: Well, you can cross these off your list... bzip2 + libbz2_1 gdbm + libgdbm-devel, libgdbm3 Note that the following do not have any compiled portions, and are therefore ready for 1.5.0 autoconf automake libtool autoconf-devel automake-devel keychain BTW, I think you *should* include the lower namespaces. Even though some will NOT be ported to 1.5.0. For instance, libbz2_0 contains /usr/bin/cygbz21.0.dll. But, cygbz21.0.dll is provided only for backwards compatibility for any programs that might be around to use it. However, there is no import library for it. Therefore, any NEWly compiled apps that link against -lbz2 will use /usr/lib/libbz2.dll.a which points to cygbz2_1.dll. Thus, I updated cygbz2_1.dll (libbz2_1 package) but not cygbz21.0.dll (libbz2_0 package). So, there are really five classes of packages: 1) already recompiled for 1.5.0 2) non-binary 3) binary, but not for new use (e.g. could be recompiled, but why?) 4) empty compatibility packages (newlib-man, texmf?) 5) need to be recompiled 1.5.0 Of these 5 classes, only those packages in #5 need anything done. Everything else is fine. So, for instance, ncurses ncurses-demo libncurses7 libncurses-devel are all #1's. But libncurses6 libncurses5 are both #3's. And, base-files is #2, while cvs is #5. Here's my first cut at a list. I know I've probably miscategorized some things, but I tried to err on the side of putting stuff into #5 (recompile me now!) -- but we want #5 to get real small :-) Thanks for doing this Chuck! I didn't have the time to traul through release/ but now you've done the leg work... :-) Elfyn -- Elfyn McBratney, EMCB | http://www.nongnu.org/wwwauth/ http://www.emcb.co.uk | http://www.emcb.co.uk/webauth/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wwwauth-users AT nongnu DOT org
Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Corinna Vinschen wrote: Move crypt to category 1 and regex to category 3. Crypt is not using any call which would change due to 1.5.0. The package would be 100% identical on a binary level. Regex is the POSIX regex functionality which is only kept for backward compatibility. The POSIX regex functionality is a Cygwin builtin since roughly french revolution (well, 1.3.1 or so). I, for one, would remove the regex package entirely from the distro. There's no package in the distro using it and the period in which Cygwin had no POSIX regex and the regex package provided a shared lib was pretty small. I was thinking the same thing. Now's a perfect time to depreciate packages we don't need around anymore. T'is a shame we don't have windows in our release dir... -- Elfyn McBratney, EMCB | http://www.nongnu.org/wwwauth/ http://www.emcb.co.uk | http://www.emcb.co.uk/webauth/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wwwauth-users AT nongnu DOT org
Re: 1.5.0 Test packages status (issue 2)
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: Elfyn McBratney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Missed termcap Ok [... going over my dependencies again] and what about XFree86-bin? The Cygwin/XFree people manage their own releases and will (most likely) be performing tests after this period. and libintl is part of the (already ported to 1.5) gettext Ok, of course. Also, some of the Awaiting... lot might not need to be re-linked, but as I don't use them, I'm not too sure and,I didn't plan on nm'ing the day away. ;-) :-) I was just thinking: how am I going to figure out what libraries are already available for 1.5, and there was your message. Most useful. Elfyn -- Elfyn McBratney, EMCB | http://www.nongnu.org/wwwauth/ http://www.emcb.co.uk | http://www.emcb.co.uk/webauth/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wwwauth-users AT nongnu DOT org
