This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps 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]

Re: Consensus about man and doc X11 directory structure


On Oct 10 21:59, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> Charles Wilson wrote:
> >Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) wrote:
> [...]
> >>What's stopping us from moving the Win32 tcltk in /opt/win32, and making
> >>new *NIX tcl and tk packages in /usr?  Then all that's necessary for
> >>insight is to add /opt/win32 to PATH (either through a script,
> >>profile.d, or manually).  Similar packages (i.e. that have both X11/*NIX
> >>and Win32 flavors) could use /opt/win32 as well.
> >
> >
> >All of this mucking about with tk and insight requires the concurrence 
> >of -- and oodles of extra work by -- the tk maintainer and the insight 
> >maintainer.  Plus, <speculation alert> given the centrality of the 
> >debugger to the GNUPro product, this sort of change might meet 
> >resistance from the PowersThatBe channeled thru our local Benign 
> >Dictator(s).
> 
> Umm... reality check:

Fine with me.

> 1) How many of our BDs actually work for Red Hat anymore?

1 (one)

> 2) Is GNUPro even a product anymore?  The only date I could find related 
> to the product mentioned "GNUPro 2001":
> 
> http://www.redhat.com/software/gnupro/technical/gnupro_gdb.html

Well, the marketing is fortunately not my job, but there is still a GnuPro
product which is worked on regulary.  Cygwin based toolchains are a part
of it.

> 3) If Red Hat isn't updating any product that uses Cygwin to provide a 
> product on Windows, then why are we holding onto this idea that we must 
> continue to support something that was once sold?
> 
> 4) If Red Hat is updating GNUPro, but doing a piss-poor job of telling 
> people about it, then what are we?  Red Hat's underground GNUPro 
> development team?

I guess I can let this go uncommented.  I have no idea how the marketing
in relation to GnuPro works.  That's not my business, so I can't tell
anything about it.

The layout of the Cygwin distro is not exactly something important to
the way GnuPro works, however.  Tcl/Tk is shipped with the Cygwin based
GnuPro toolchains, so where it is in the distro is free for discussion.

But, apart from GnuPro, I don't think it's such a good idea to move the
Windows-based Tcl/Tk DLLs out of /usr/bin without having a clear idea
how the replacement should work for the Windows-based apps like Insight.

Even better, I don't think the DLLs should be moved somewhere else at all.
The POSIX-based DLLs should follow the Cygwin naming convention anyway,
so they would have to be named cygtcl8.4.dll/cygtk8.4.dll (or whatever
the version number is right now).  They don't collide with the Win-based
ones, so what?

As for the other stuff (includes, libs, /usr/share/tk8.4, etc), I think
this would be ok to be moved to /opt or /usr/lib/win or something.

However, how to handle the tcltk package and as a result, the GDB package,
is up to Chris, he's the maintainer after all, not I or Red Hat.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]