Re: [ITP] glib-1.2.10
Yaakov Selkowitz writes: I would like to contribute glib-1.2 to the Cygwin distribution. +1 from me Ciao Volker
Re: [ITP] gtk+-1.2.10
Yaakov Selkowitz writes: I would like to contribute gtk+-1.2 to the Cygwin distribution. This will allow porting of those apps which still use this version of GTK+ (e.g. dillo, gnucash). This package can install parallel to gtk2. +1 from me. Ciao Volker
Re: Setup breakage
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, David A. Cobb wrote: Using SETUP 2.427 (and re-downloaded it just today to make sure it wasn't compromised). While downloading the Xorg stuff, I get a message box Microsoft Visual C Runtime: The application has requested termination in an unusual manner . . That's not good... Definitely sounds like a bug. And that's all for that. Repeats with perfect consistency, but I'm not sure it's always during the same file download. Q: HOW TO DEBUG THIS -- I know Setup is not, itself, a Cygwin app; so I wouldn't expect gdb to be much help. gdb works just fine on non-Cygwin apps, as long as you have the debug symbols in them. Build setup from source, and you should be able to debug it. I've put a debug build at: http://cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/ should that be easier for you. IIRC, that error message means abort() was called. Max.
Re: [ITP] glib-1.2.10
On Aug 26 09:52, Dr. Volker Zell wrote: Yaakov Selkowitz writes: I would like to contribute glib-1.2 to the Cygwin distribution. +1 from me Ciao Volker This package as well as gtk+ are auto-voted per decree. Are you going to review them, Volker? :-) Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.
Re: Gnome for cygwin
Hi Jani, I moved this thread to cygwin-apps, are you already subscribed there? you wrote: I might be able to help with some... Since I'm messing with Gnome stuff already... =) Great! Yaakov and I have already started to port the most needed stuff. But there are so many packages, we really need more hands. What is already included: glib2 atk pango gtk2 libIDL ORBit2 intltool plus some graphic libs and other prerequisites. Currently I'm working on libbonobo. Next needed packages are: gconf gnome-vfs I have problems with the gnome-vfs testsuite, there are errors. If you could help to track this down? If you need help with building libbonobo with shared libs I could send you my patches, but I guess I'll upload it the next weekend anyway. Then all prerequisites to build gconf and gnome-vfs are fullfilled. Then there are still many pending packages, just pick one from the installationorder list and build it. Look into the source packages which are already uploaded (e.g. libcroco or lcms for a small package or glib2 for a bigger package, we use the generic-build-script as base script, then modify it for splitting the distributed packages into devel and runtime and doc packages, plus some additional configure options (i.e. --disable-static --disable-gtk-doc), then add the path of a fresh compiled dll to global PATH when the dll is used during the build. I posted a libtool patch recently, it is needed when using gcc-3.4 and latest binutils since there are tags in the objects which are not recognized by libtool. I use a patch to libtool which is needed when fresh compiled executables which are used during the build. Sometimes there is also needed to allow libtool to link in static libs like e.g. termcap into a dll. The patches are attached. The installation order list: shared-mime-info - Yaakov has a version at his SF site already. gconf gnome-mime-data gnome-vfs libgnome libglade libgnomecanvas libbonoboui hicolor-icon-theme (freedesktop.org) gnome-icon-theme gnome-keyring libgnomeui startup-notification gtk-engines gnome-themes scrollkeeper gnome-desktop libwnck gnome-panel gnome-session vte gnome-terminal libgtop gail libgtkhtml Then I could need some hints how to initialize a Gnome session. How do I start the Gnome desktop? This is really a stupid question, but I never found a simple 'Howto' about what needs to be started. I would like a simple script like startxwin.sh which starts X when not already ruinning and fires up all what is needed to get the Gnome desktop on the screen, say startgnome.sh or so. Gerrit -- =^..^= libtool.m4.patch Description: Binary data ltmain.diff Description: Binary data
Re: postgresql-7.4.5-1 ready for review
Reini, On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:09:26PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: ok, postgresql-7.4.5-1 is ready. Thanks, but I'm going to upload a postgresql-7.4.5-1 shortly. Let's transition maintainership in the 8.0 time frame. The problems were cygipc related (of course), which I patched away in configure. AFAICT, there should not be any cygipc problems as long as it is not installed on the build system. All tests passed ok (besides one minor cr/lf issue. see attached) horology fails for me too, but the failure is due to daylight saving issues (i.e., PDT vs. PST) not a textmode issue. just the setup.hint is missing. This is your (Jason) job :) The setup.hint already on sources does not require any updating. The src package is similar to your old setup, (orisrc/ plus orisrc/CYGWIN-PATCHES/) but it really should be changed to orisrc.tar.bz2 and the build and patch file. I'll to change that with the 8.0.0beta1 package. The above is fine -- just call me old fashioned... :,) Jason Tishler schrieb: Hmm... What does cygcheck indicate? The problem was this autoconf line (configure.in): AC_CHECK_LIB(cygipc, shmget) we have now native cygwin shmget support. so this check is bogus. we really should add a check if shmget is in sys/shm.h something like AC_CHECK_LIB(, shmget) AFAICT, the above change is not necessary: checking for shmget in -lcygipc... no ... checking sys/ipc.h usability... yes checking sys/ipc.h presence... yes checking for sys/ipc.h... yes Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
Re: postgresql-7.4.5-1 ready for review
Jason Tishler schrieb: On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 08:09:26PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: ok, postgresql-7.4.5-1 is ready. Thanks, but I'm going to upload a postgresql-7.4.5-1 shortly. Let's transition maintainership in the 8.0 time frame. Super. So I can check tcl also. Please also check my version of the cygwin README. I added a Whats new section. The new native win32 server is very good, but the cygwin port is much more compatible to the unix version, and most people will prefer cygwin as development platform. Just to test it. AFAICT, the above change is not necessary: checking for shmget in -lcygipc... no ... checking sys/ipc.h usability... yes checking sys/ipc.h presence... yes checking for sys/ipc.h... yes The problem is, that I still have cygipc installed, so it will find it, even if cygserver is running. Others maybe also. Call it defensive programming. Anyway my postgresql-7.4.5-1 cygipc configure.in patch is pending, and will be useful for the 8 series also. -- Reini Urban http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/
RFC: Packaging O'Caml
Hi, In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package, or does anyone know of anything that could be done to enable it? I recall a similar discussion regarding GraphViz, and the decision to not package it. AFAIU, I can still use the Cygwin builds of both O'Caml and GraphViz internally within my organization without violating the GPL. Comments? Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: [ITP] glib-1.2.10
Yaakov schrieb: I would like to contribute glib-1.2 to the Cygwin distribution. I was able to build and run dillo with the glib/gtk runtime/devel packages, so it seems these are working ok. Have not tried to rebuild the packages, however I believe it would work, so I would say, GTG;) Gerrit -- =^..^=
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
Igor schrieb: Hi, In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. +1 vote from me. However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package, or does anyone know of anything that could be done to enable it? Huh? It is OSI certified: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/qtpl.php I recall a similar discussion regarding GraphViz, and the decision to not package it. AFAIU, I can still use the Cygwin builds of both O'Caml and GraphViz internally within my organization without violating the GPL. Comments? Igor Gerrit -- =^..^=
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Igor schrieb: Hi, In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. +1 vote from me. Thanks, Gerrit. At this stage, though, I'm less concerned with getting the votes, and more with the licensing issues. BTW, you ported the earlier versions of O'Caml to Cygwin, didn't you? However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package, or does anyone know of anything that could be done to enable it? Huh? It is OSI certified: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/qtpl.php Yes, but GPL incompatible (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html). Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
RE: Packaging O'Caml
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package [...] ? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. IANAL, but the Q Public License is listed on the OSI web page, so there don't appear to be any legal restrictions-- some Cygwin packages use different open source licenses already. Or have there been policy changes for new Cygwin packages that I'm not aware of? -Jerry
Heads-Up: tempfile missing (Attn: findutils, bzip2 maintainers)
Hi, all, I just noticed that /bin/updatedb (from findutils) and /bin/bzdiff (from bzip2) use tempfile, which is non-POSIX, and is missing under Cygwin. The fact that tempfile is missing was reported as early as a year and a half ago (http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-01/msg00876.html), but the main point is that the scripts aren't portable. For a fix, see how /bin/vimtutor and /bin/bashbug do it. I'd be happy to provide the actual patches if needed, but they will probably need to be relayed upstream, which is where the maintainers come in. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
RE: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package [...] ? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. Interestingly enough, this doesn't mention cygwin1.dll, only libcygwin.a, but I may be nitpicking... IANAL, but the Q Public License is listed on the OSI web page, so there don't appear to be any legal restrictions -- some Cygwin packages use different open source licenses already. Or have there been policy changes for new Cygwin packages that I'm not aware of? What threw me off was this sentense on the GNU GPL licensing page (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html): Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no matter how. However, it seems I didn't read the document carefully enough, as it goes on to say However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program by adding a notice like this to it: As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. which is almost exactly what you quoted from the Cygwin licensing page. So I guess we're ok. As soon as I work out the packaging bugs, I'll ITP O'Caml. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. However, parts of it are released under the Q It's great to hear it. But did you think about packaging GODI? http://www.ocaml-programming.de/godi/ It should also be able to build OOTB, though there are some restrictions for environment.
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
Igor schrieb: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Igor schrieb: Hi, In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. +1 vote from me. Thanks, Gerrit. At this stage, though, I'm less concerned with getting the votes, and more with the licensing issues. BTW, you ported the earlier versions of O'Caml to Cygwin, didn't you? There was not much porting needed, I have it still online here: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/ocaml/ and see the patch for the latest version I did: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/ocaml/3.07beta2/ocaml-3.07beta2-1.patch Used this build script: #!/bin/sh cd ocaml-3.07beta2 make clean ./configure -with-pthread \ 21 | tee log.configure make world 21 | tee log.world make bootstrap 21 | tee log.bootstrap make opt 21 | tee log.opt make opt.opt 21 | tee log.opt.opt echo echo All done! Run make install now echo even they stated in earlier versions that threads are not working with cygwin. But I never got to use it really. However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package, or does anyone know of anything that could be done to enable it? Huh? It is OSI certified: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/qtpl.php Yes, but GPL incompatible (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html). Igor ianal, but i see there are also openssl, apache, and other licenses listed where packages are already included in the netrelease. Gerrit -- =^..^=
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Eugene Kotlyarov wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. However, parts of it are released under the Q It's great to hear it. But did you think about packaging GODI? http://www.ocaml-programming.de/godi/ It should also be able to build OOTB, though there are some restrictions for environment. Eugene, No, I haven't thought about it. Basically, I'm going to need O'Caml for my work, so I'm willing to maintain it. I doubt I'll have the time to understand, build, and provide support for GODI (which, at first glance, seems to be an O'Caml equivalent of CPAN). If it becomes a requirement for me, and I end up building and using it, then I'll consider packaging it for Cygwin and maintaining it. In the meantime, you're welcome to step in if you wish, and ITP it separately. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Igor schrieb: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Igor schrieb: Hi, In the course of my real job duties, I built O'Caml under Cygwin. It builds OOTB, and, even though there seem to be some minor packaging issues to be worked out, looks like it'll be easy to package nicely, so I was considering ITPing it. +1 vote from me. Thanks, Gerrit. At this stage, though, I'm less concerned with getting the votes, and more with the licensing issues. BTW, you ported the earlier versions of O'Caml to Cygwin, didn't you? There was not much porting needed, I have it still online here: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/ocaml/ and see the patch for the latest version I did: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/ocaml/3.07beta2/ocaml-3.07beta2-1.patch Used this build script: [script snipped] even they stated in earlier versions that threads are not working with cygwin. But I never got to use it really. Yep, saw that one, thanks. Your patch is already incorporated into the official sources, and -with-pthread is the default and is ignored. It actually builds OOTB on Cygwin now. Don't know if threads work, though -- I'm still trying to get O'Caml to run properly (I keep getting the No bytecode file specified message)... Do you want to discuss this off-list? However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package, or does anyone know of anything that could be done to enable it? Huh? It is OSI certified: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/qtpl.php Yes, but GPL incompatible (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html). Igor ianal, but i see there are also openssl, apache, and other licenses listed where packages are already included in the netrelease. Yeah, I think I already figured this one out. The clause in the Cygwin licensing that Jerry Williams pointed out seems to cover it. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: I'm still trying to get O'Caml to run properly (I keep getting the No bytecode file specified message) This sometimes means that the executable has been damaged by stripping it. Max.
Re: Packaging O'Caml
Wow, this is amazing. In all of the years that you've been following cygwin in the mailing list, this is the first time you've ever read the licensing page? On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 02:46:55PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package [...] ? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. Interestingly enough, this doesn't mention cygwin1.dll, only libcygwin.a, but I may be nitpicking... Or, you may be missing the point. When that sentence was written you couldn't do something like gcc -o foo foo.c /bin/cygwin1.dll. You had to gcc -o foo foo.c -lcygwin. The act of linking something with your program is part of what causes the GPL to become active. Including pieces from libcygwin.a into your program is part of what exercises the GPL. Other methods of linking are not covered by this generous exception. IANAL, but the Q Public License is listed on the OSI web page, so there don't appear to be any legal restrictions -- some Cygwin packages use different open source licenses already. Or have there been policy changes for new Cygwin packages that I'm not aware of? What threw me off was this sentense on the GNU GPL licensing page (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html): Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no matter how. Since cygwin has an exception to the GPL, this section is potentially irrelevant. However, it seems I didn't read the document carefully enough, as it goes on to say However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program by adding a notice like this to it: As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. which is almost exactly what you quoted from the Cygwin licensing page. So I guess we're ok. As soon as I work out the packaging bugs, I'll ITP O'Caml. No, it is not the same thing. The exception in the cygwin licensing allows other licenses to still have effect as long as they adhere to the open source definitions mentioned. The GPL doesn't trump these licenses, although if you adhere to the GPL, then that's all the better. cgf
Re: RFC: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Max Bowsher wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: I'm still trying to get O'Caml to run properly (I keep getting the No bytecode file specified message) This sometimes means that the executable has been damaged by stripping it. Right. I've seen this on the ocaml lists, so turned off stripping. However, I just realized that I got hit by caching again -- I've built a new tarball of the package, but the one that got installed was the old one, with the stripped binaries. Rats! Thanks for the help, Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: Wow, this is amazing. In all of the years that you've been following cygwin in the mailing list, this is the first time you've ever read the licensing page? Oh, I've read it before, but this particular exception seemed to not wedge itself in my mind as firmly as the rest of it. :-) On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 02:46:55PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package [...] ? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. Interestingly enough, this doesn't mention cygwin1.dll, only libcygwin.a, but I may be nitpicking... Or, you may be missing the point. When that sentence was written you couldn't do something like gcc -o foo foo.c /bin/cygwin1.dll. You had to gcc -o foo foo.c -lcygwin. The act of linking something with your program is part of what causes the GPL to become active. Including pieces from libcygwin.a into your program is part of what exercises the GPL. Other methods of linking are not covered by this generous exception. Huh? So, for example, if one builds a program that uses, say, cygncurses7.dll (by linking with /usr/lib/libncurses.dll.a), which, in turn, uses cygwin1.dll, that program cannot be released under any license that's incompatible with GPL? IANAL, but the Q Public License is listed on the OSI web page, so there don't appear to be any legal restrictions -- some Cygwin packages use different open source licenses already. Or have there been policy changes for new Cygwin packages that I'm not aware of? What threw me off was this sentense on the GNU GPL licensing page (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html): Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no matter how. Since cygwin has an exception to the GPL, this section is potentially irrelevant. Yep, that's what I said below. However, it seems I didn't read the document carefully enough, as it goes on to say However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program by adding a notice like this to it: As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. which is almost exactly what you quoted from the Cygwin licensing page. So I guess we're ok. As soon as I work out the packaging bugs, I'll ITP O'Caml. No, it is not the same thing. The exception in the cygwin licensing allows other licenses to still have effect as long as they adhere to the open source definitions mentioned. The GPL doesn't trump these licenses, although if you adhere to the GPL, then that's all the better. Ah, you're right, the above quote is the inverse of that on the Cygwin licensing page. However, from the earlier discussion, it does seem like releasing the Cygwin binary of O'Caml won't conflict with the terms of Cygwin licensing. Am I correct in my interpretation? Thanks, Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Happiness lies in being privileged to work hard for long hours in doing whatever you think is worth doing. -- Dr. Jubal Harshaw
Re: Gnome for cygwin
Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Hi Jani, I moved this thread to cygwin-apps, are you already subscribed there? Not yet... But soon I'll will. you wrote: I might be able to help with some... Since I'm messing with Gnome stuff already... =) Great! Yaakov and I have already started to port the most needed stuff. But there are so many packages, we really need more hands. What is already included: glib2 atk pango gtk2 libIDL ORBit2 intltool plus some graphic libs and other prerequisites. Currently I'm working on libbonobo. Next needed packages are: gconf gnome-vfs Well, how (in)convenient. I just had program that uses those libs... =) I have problems with the gnome-vfs testsuite, there are errors. If you could help to track this down? If you need help with building libbonobo with shared libs I could send you my patches, but I guess I'll upload it the next weekend anyway. Then all prerequisites to build gconf and gnome-vfs are fullfilled. Then there are still many pending packages, just pick one from the installationorder list and build it. Look into the source packages which are already uploaded (e.g. libcroco or lcms for a small package or glib2 for a bigger package, we use the generic-build-script as base script, then modify it for splitting the distributed packages into devel and runtime and doc packages, plus some additional configure options (i.e. --disable-static --disable-gtk-doc), then add the path of a fresh compiled dll to global PATH when the dll is used during the build. I posted a libtool patch recently, it is needed when using gcc-3.4 and latest binutils since there are tags in the objects which are not recognized by libtool. I use a patch to libtool which is needed when fresh compiled executables which are used during the build. Sometimes there is also needed to allow libtool to link in static libs like e.g. termcap into a dll. The patches are attached. The installation order list: shared-mime-info - Yaakov has a version at his SF site already. gconf gnome-mime-data gnome-vfs libgnome libglade libgnomecanvas libbonoboui hicolor-icon-theme (freedesktop.org) gnome-icon-theme gnome-keyring libgnomeui startup-notification gtk-engines gnome-themes scrollkeeper gnome-desktop libwnck gnome-panel gnome-session vte gnome-terminal libgtop gail libgtkhtml Well I'll see what I can do about these. Can't really promise anything yet, but time will tell. Then I could need some hints how to initialize a Gnome session. How do I start the Gnome desktop? This is really a stupid question, but I never found a simple 'Howto' about what needs to be started. I would like a simple script like startxwin.sh which starts X when not already ruinning and fires up all what is needed to get the Gnome desktop on the screen, say startgnome.sh or so. I recall that cygnome2 has pretty good instructions to start gnome. -- Jani Tiainen
Re: Gnome for cygwin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gerrit P. Haase wrote: | Next needed packages are: | gconf | gnome-vfs | | I have problems with the gnome-vfs testsuite, there are errors. As I wrote before, GConf likely needs some work. I would see what CyGnome2 has done with this to start. Don't know about gnome-vfs. | The installation order list: | shared-mime-info - Yaakov has a version at his SF site already. | libglade | libgnomecanvas I've already ported libglade and libgnomecanvas on cygwin-ports. When building yourself, make sure to build libglade first; libgnomecanvas installs a glade module if libglade is present. | hicolor-icon-theme (freedesktop.org) | gnome-icon-theme | startup-notification I have these also at cygwin-ports. | gtk-engines I just built this one; it's really straight forward. | libwnck This one's also at cygwin-ports; since it's still API-unstable, the package names are versioned. | vte This needs some patches to build; see what cygnome2 did for starters. In addition, I've ported bindings for C++ (gtkmm.org), Perl, Python, Ruby, and Tcl. I would imagine that at least the C++ and Python bindings would be generally useful. Yaakov -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBLl9mpiWmPGlmQSMRAvREAKDW5eXQ2LgeAhI6kMG5wwhn0zbaPQCgggoy KMsc+C0gkocyULAMECVvBrk= =nq91 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [ITP] glib-1.2.10
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Corinna Vinschen wrote: | This package as well as gtk+ are auto-voted per decree. Are you going | to review them, Volker? :-) Well, that's nice to hear. :-) Gerrit gave these a GTG, so could someone please upload them? Thanks! Yaakov -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBLmkqpiWmPGlmQSMRAnFyAKDaV+0BXI/iISyZ8YMfWhgGhiKhtQCdHZi7 ywXbsWYW2Df7Ddn/DS6h2MI= =MQl4 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Setup breakage -- gdb output
Max Bowsher wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, David A. Cobb wrote: Using SETUP 2.427 (and re-downloaded it just today to make sure it wasn't compromised). While downloading the Xorg stuff, I get a message box Microsoft Visual C Runtime: The application has requested termination in an unusual manner . . That's not good... Definitely sounds like a bug. And that's all for that. Repeats with perfect consistency, but I'm not sure it's always during the same file download. Q: HOW TO DEBUG THIS -- I know Setup is not, itself, a Cygwin app; so I wouldn't expect gdb to be much help. gdb works just fine on non-Cygwin apps, as long as you have the debug symbols in them. Build setup from source, and you should be able to debug it. I've put a debug build at: http://cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/ should that be easier for you. IIRC, that error message means abort() was called. Max. Yes, thank you. I used the MinGW32 port of gdb. Output is attached. It doesn't tell me anything; the same error message issued, this time I wasn't downloading the Xorg stuff -- the error occurred during download of postgresql. Nothing shows in what I see as output, no events that I was catching (or know how to catch). At the end, there's no stack or anything to debug. ATTACHED: My INSTALLED.DB, Latest SETUP.LOG.FULL, CYGCHECK OUTPUT, GDB OUTPUT All BZIP2 -- David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access Advocate By God's Grace, I am a Christian man; by my actions a great sinner. -- The Way of a Pilgrim: R.French, Tr. Life is too short to tolerate crappy software! setup.log.full.bz2 Description: Binary data CygCheck-srv_20040826.txt.bz2 Description: Binary data Cygwin-Setup2.429_20040826.log.bz2 Description: Binary data installed.db.bz2 Description: Binary data begin:vcard fn:David A. Cobb n:Cobb;David A. adr:;;7 Lenox Av #1;West Warwick;RI;02893-3918;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Independent Software Consultant note:PGP Key ID#0x4C293929 effective 01/28/2004 x-mozilla-html:TRUE version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: Heads-Up: tempfile missing (Attn: findutils, bzip2 maintainers)
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: Hi, all, I just noticed that /bin/updatedb (from findutils) and /bin/bzdiff (from bzip2) use tempfile, which is non-POSIX, and is missing under Cygwin. Noted, thanks. Will fix in next release. -- Chuck
Re: Packaging O'Caml
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 04:33:38PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Aug 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:46:55PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: However, parts of it are released under the Q Public license, which GNU lists explicitly as non-GPL-compatible. Does this mean an automatic no to an official Cygwin package [...] ? From http://cygwin.com/licensing.html: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. Interestingly enough, this doesn't mention cygwin1.dll, only libcygwin.a, but I may be nitpicking... Or, you may be missing the point. When that sentence was written you couldn't do something like gcc -o foo foo.c /bin/cygwin1.dll. You had to gcc -o foo foo.c -lcygwin. The act of linking something with your program is part of what causes the GPL to become active. Including pieces from libcygwin.a into your program is part of what exercises the GPL. Other methods of linking are not covered by this generous exception. Huh? So, for example, if one builds a program that uses, say, cygncurses7.dll (by linking with /usr/lib/libncurses.dll.a), which, in turn, uses cygwin1.dll, that program cannot be released under any license that's incompatible with GPL? Huh? right back at you. When you build a program using gcc on cygwin, you link in libcygwin.a unless you specifically tell gcc not to do so. If you do not link in libcygwin.a then either 1) you are not building a cygwin program, or you are 2) inexplicably linking using just the cygwin1.dll directly (which probably wouldn't work anyway). In either case you would not be covered by the license exception. In the first case it would hardly matter and in the second case, it is just an artifact of the fact that linking directly to the dll didn't work when the licensing words were written. I don't know what libncurses has to do with anything unless libncurses has its own licensing arrangements which could supersede cygwin's. Obviously the cygwin dll can't impose it's own notion of acceptable licensing if another package's terms are more stringent. If you are postulating that it could be somehow possible to build a DLL which links with cygwin and is then usable in a mingw application then, yes, the GPL exception would not apply if you follow the strict wording. It also wouldn't necessarily apply if you dynamically loaded cygwin although, IIRC, the jury is still out on whether dynamic loading should excersize the GPL or not. IANAL, but the Q Public License is listed on the OSI web page, so there don't appear to be any legal restrictions -- some Cygwin packages use different open source licenses already. Or have there been policy changes for new Cygwin packages that I'm not aware of? What threw me off was this sentense on the GNU GPL licensing page (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html): Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no matter how. Since cygwin has an exception to the GPL, this section is potentially irrelevant. Yep, that's what I said below. No, you seemed to be implying that the GPL automatically kicks in when that isn't necessarily correct. However, it seems I didn't read the document carefully enough, as it goes on to say However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered library (called FOO), and you want to release your program under the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict for your program by adding a notice like this to it: As a special exception, you have permission to link this program with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the software in the executable aside from FOO. which is almost exactly what you quoted from the Cygwin licensing page. So I guess we're ok. As soon as I work out the packaging bugs, I'll ITP O'Caml. No, it is not the same thing. The exception in the cygwin licensing allows other licenses to still have effect as long as they adhere to the open source definitions mentioned. The GPL doesn't trump these licenses, although if you adhere to the GPL, then that's all the better. Ah, you're right, the above quote is the inverse of that on the Cygwin licensing page. However, from the earlier discussion, it does seem like releasing the Cygwin binary of O'Caml won't conflict with the terms of Cygwin licensing. Am I correct in my interpretation? If the QPL is acceptable as per the dictates of the cygwin exception, then yes. It
Re: Gnome for cygwin
Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gerrit P. Haase wrote: | Next needed packages are: | gconf | gnome-vfs | | I have problems with the gnome-vfs testsuite, there are errors. As I wrote before, GConf likely needs some work. I would see what CyGnome2 has done with this to start. Don't know about gnome-vfs. As little as I am familiar with cygnome2 (and by building these gnome2 libs by myself). GConf(d) has some problems with proper termination. Since gconfd should terminate itself after timeout period after last app has signed itself out. It doesn't work in cygnome2 and AFAIK it's still under progress. | The installation order list: | shared-mime-info - Yaakov has a version at his SF site already. | libglade | libgnomecanvas I've already ported libglade and libgnomecanvas on cygwin-ports. When building yourself, make sure to build libglade first; libgnomecanvas installs a glade module if libglade is present. I recall that both compiled just out-of-box with proper parameters without any extra magic or patching. -- Jani Tiainen
