From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 76849 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2018 19:24:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 76783 invoked by uid 89); 20 Feb 2018 19:24:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: limerock01.mail.cornell.edu Received: from limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (HELO limerock01.mail.cornell.edu) (128.84.13.241) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:24:33 +0000 X-CornellRouted: This message has been Routed already. Received: from authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (granite4.serverfarm.cornell.edu [10.16.197.9]) by limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4_cu) with ESMTP id w1KJOV4o031653 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 14:24:31 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.15] (mta-68-175-129-7.twcny.rr.com [68.175.129.7] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.12.10) with ESMTP id w1KJOTpq021361 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 14:24:30 -0500 Subject: Re: Advice needed on ffcall packaging To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com References: <47b9c3bd-2e2c-65e1-2c8b-cf9c35e0ed18@cygwin.com> From: Ken Brown Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 19:24:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <47b9c3bd-2e2c-65e1-2c8b-cf9c35e0ed18@cygwin.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-PMX-Cornell-Gauge: Gauge=XXXXX X-PMX-CORNELL-AUTH-RESULTS: dkim-out=none; X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-02/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 On 2/20/2018 1:41 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On 2018-02-20 09:47, Ken Brown wrote: >> A few years ago I adopted ffcall (32-bit only) in order to keep it from >> disappearing from the distro: >> >> The latest upstream release builds on 64-bit Cygwin, so I'd like to >> update the package, and I'd like to find a sensible way of breaking it >> up into subpackages.  Here are the relevant facts: >> >> 1. Cygwin's existing (32-bit) ffcall is really a devel package: It >> consists of headers, four (static) libs, and documentation.  There are >> no subpackages and no shared libs. >> >> 2. The build of the current release produces the same four static libs, >> plus shared versions of the first three, plus a new lib, both static and >> shared (libffcall.a and cygffcall-0.dll). >> >> If I were starting from scratch, I would have three packages: ffcall, >> libffcall0, and libffcall-devel.  ffcall would be source only; >> libffcall0 would contain the shared libs *.dll; and libffcall-devel >> would contain the headers, the import libs *.dll.a, and the one static >> lib for which there is no shared version.  I wouldn't ship the other >> static libs unless I discover later that they're needed for some reason. >> >> But I'm not starting from scratch, and users of the existing ffcall will >> need the new libffcall-devel. > > NAME=ffcall > ... > PKG_NAMES="libffcall0 libffcall-devel" > libffcall0_CONTENTS=... > libffcall_devel_OBSOLETES="ffcall" > libffcall_devel_CONTENTS=... Thanks! It would never have occurred to me that a package could be obsoleted by one of its subpackages. Ken