This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
I think this is slighty over-complicated, but only slightly.
A bzipped tarball with cygpcre.dll, cygpcre-0.dll, cygpcreposix.dll and cygpcreposix-0.dll is only 7 K larger than a bzipped tarball with only the unversioned DLLs.
IOW, two seconds worth of downloading on a 4K/s modem. Putting both in a single tarball will make the libpcre0 package unnecessary. The binaries (pcretest, pcregrep) will be linked with the versioned versions, the devel files (good idea, IMHO) will link with the versioned versions as well, and the unversioned versions will disappear (with lots of flashing light in the announcement message, of course) after a couple of weeks.
That will allow the various users of pcre to catch up without breaking anything, and with the small size of pcre, we can keep the unversioned versions around quite a while if we want to..
Again, because your new cygpcreposix-0.dll is fubared.
That's what I thought.
The thing is: because I was the onle one seeing the problem until now, I was beginning to think it might be a cockpit error "chez moi"..
I was kinda hopinh to avoid the package jugling (how do you write that anyway?) but I do agree it's a better idea to use Libtool if we can..
[snipped anecdote]
Send an email to the cygwin-apps mailing list, like this one:
"ATTN: Apache, Perl, Python, and Exim maintainers" http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-03/msg00675.html
I'll do that.
[snipped (buried) the dead horse]
So, cygpcreposix-0.dll IS properly linked to cygpcre-0.dll.
I found that too, but..
Next, I did the 'pcre-4.2-1.sh install' and looked in <srcdir>/.inst/usr/bin. And whaddaya know:
I found that too :\
At least I'm not hallucinating - ye never can tell: I'm Dutch ;)
Sorry that I didn't have better news.
Actually, you showed that I'm not insane, which is nice to know ;)
I don't much like the hack, but if it's the only thing to do to work around this libtool bug, and if libtool 1.5.1 will not contain this bug, I'll just put it in a chunck in the patch I can later remove..
Thanks, Chuck, for your help.
I'll make a new version of pcre available asap (tomorow, probably).
Personally, because pcre is so very small, I think it's not really worth it to break it up into three (or more) packages: a single pcre package with two versions of the DLLs will increase download time by two seconds for people using modems (does anyone use less that a 4K/s modem nowadays?) Asking the cygwin@ list about it would create more trafic than two separate packages will spare, and it's even more transparent to the end user not splitting it up..
So, if nobody protests loudly, there'll be a single pcre package with two versions of each DLL in it for a while (either until the next release of pcre, or until the next full moon, whichever comes first ;)
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |