From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtpout2.vodafonemail.de (smtpout2.vodafonemail.de [145.253.239.133]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE3FC3858403 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 19:33:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org EE3FC3858403 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexgo.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexgo.de Received: from smtp.vodafone.de (unknown [10.2.0.37]) by smtpout2.vodafonemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4083E613FA for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:33:40 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nexgo.de; s=vfde-smtpout-mb-15sep; t=1635795220; bh=psMGkapqA4McCuUWTSJc7WZMQCUNoT1zKyGWwkE4rI4=; h=From:To:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=SyN1QiSCThfbkk8qN1jdfqATN7grho5WJYAJcPQEDMzd4MmqKhnscC2LS0h7Yh4Sz c0qbaHg7xkZaJV2n17I/ZHwRiu5I96jW3aiGbNOvCQ4dj5hA7eBkK9vxZvKt6SNgQN N2SndtPquntHORLb7UiIkgbfKs3E1ALV5wZ1aTTI= Received: from Gertrud (p54a0cb96.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.160.203.150]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.vodafone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4HjjrM4X53zJmhj for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 19:33:39 +0000 (UTC) From: Achim Gratz To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Dropping various support in future releases - what about Mingw? References: <87y267zvqp.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <6a075655-7038-e3ae-8beb-a184600c1265@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 20:33:32 +0100 In-Reply-To: <6a075655-7038-e3ae-8beb-a184600c1265@SystematicSw.ab.ca> (Brian Inglis's message of "Mon, 1 Nov 2021 12:47:08 -0600") Message-ID: <87tugvzn5f.fsf@Rainer.invalid> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-purgate-type: clean X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information) X-purgate: clean X-purgate-size: 2211 X-purgate-ID: 149169::1635795219-00001452-8436E72D/0/0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3024.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, LIKELY_SPAM_BODY, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPAM_URI, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin package maintainer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 19:33:50 -0000 Brian Inglis writes: > Are they actually being used for anything, in this Cygwin project, or > the associated Mingw or Wine projects, or are they holdovers from some > earlier RedHat project? It would help if you asked questions that are answerable. I have no idea what you refer to as "they" above. As said before, there are examples for everything; looking at a few of my own packages: GMP, MPFR and ISL are needed for the MingW cross-compilation toolchain, ZStd for setup, cfitsio I have no idea. > They appear to duplicate the Fedora packages, so who is using which > package builds? For a start, have a look which packages require mingw64-* packages. If you want to drop a package that seems to be unused, just say so and if it's still needed you will likely hear who is that customer. > I support packages I use, or libraries used by those packages, as I > can dogfood them before release. > I am uncomfortable that I can not do so to test the Mingw devel > packages I upgrade with their Cygwin equivalents, and know so little > about their potential uses. You will never be able to fully vet each package if it has any complexity, so you either get comforatble with the fact that often the actual users will have more insight than you or (again) drop maintenance. > I mean the Mingw packages are sufficiently different from the Cygwin > packages that they are effectively another different package, but > requiring two separate cygport files. I think of the two cygport files as a wart and the separate Git archives is another one even though Jon insists we need to keep it. > The inherit mingw cygclass intended to allow Mingw packages to be > built like Cygwin packages using the same cygport for both arches, and > not require two additional cygport files, two git-cygwin-package > repos, etc. > It appears to work okay up to the compile but not install, package, > etc. cygport stages. I've never started to use this cygclass as it seemed incomplete when it was introduced, so I can't comment. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ DIY Stuff: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/DIY.html