This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: pdksh package proposal
- From: "Elfyn McBratney" <elfyn dot mcbratney at exposure dot org dot uk>
- To: "cygwin-apps" <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:04:35 -0000
- Subject: Re: pdksh package proposal
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302231731320.8725-100000@moria.atlanticsky.com>
- Reply-to: "Elfyn McBratney" <elfyn at exposure dot org dot uk>
> The source package is still not valid. Ditto, for the readme. Have you
> read my original post ? There, I've put the part of the readme, which
> is not valid.
Yes I read your post. When you said cygwin-specific you didn't mean the same
as in /usr/doc/Cygwin? The only cygwin-specific change is to get it to
compile. Should I add "changed blah to compile cleanly", more text
obviously, to a README file in CYGWIN-PATCHES?
> Your source package does not conform to 'Method Two', though you seem to
> be convinced that it is.
Sorry this is totally new to me, I'm going with "Method One". I was a bit
confused but have read the document again since.
> A conforming sourcepackage 'name-version-cygwinrelease-src.tar.bz2'
> should contain:
>
> name-version.tar.gz or name-version.tar.bz2 (original source)
> name-version-cygwinrelease.patch (cygwin specific changes)
> name-version-cygwinrelease.sh (build script from Charles Wilson, modified
> to fit you package)
>
> When the contents of such a package are extracted to /usr/src,
> the user can go there and type:
>
> ./name-version-cygwinrelease.sh all
The -src package contains the the original source for pdksh (extracted, not
in gz or bz2 form) and the patch used to get pdksh to compile, in the root
of the -src archive.
> This script will:
>
> 1. extract the contents of name-version.tar.gz (original distro)
> 2. patch the original source
> 3. create helper directories
> 4. configure
> 5. build
> 6. create source and binary packages
>
> With the source package for pdksh this is not possible.
>
> > - Moved ksh.exe pdksh.exe
>
> Maybe you should do the same for the man page. Currently it is installed
> as ksh.1.
Ok, I'll rename the man page. Should I create a link also if non-existant?
Sorry if this is annoying, I was using apache as an example of "Method One"
and heard talk of the build script and that blew me away :-)
Regards,
Elfyn McBratney
elfyn at exposure dot org dot uk
www.exposure.org.uk