On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 14:20:31 +0000
Jon Turney wrote:
> On 27/11/2025 13:46, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 16:57:37 +0900
> > Takashi Yano wrote:
> >> One year ago, cygport archives ${NAME}-${VERSION}-${RELEASE}.cygwin.patch
> >> into source package automatically. However, it does not seem to archive
> >> now.
> >>
> >> Is this intentional behaviour?
>
> Yes.
>
> I did some work a while ago to simplify the functionality this ancient
> and confusing mechanism provided.
>
> Briefly, the .cygwin.patch file is applied to an empty ${C} directory to
> create a set of files. Cygwin READMEs, custom post-install/pre-remove
> scripts and shell profile scripts found in ${C} are then automatically
> installed (as per the "Postinstall" chapter in the cygport reference
> manual).
>
> This is just strange, and kind of awkward to work with when building
> from a packaging repo, as you can't work directly with these files, only
> a patch which makes them.
>
> So I added a new mechanism where these files can be named in CYGWN_FILES
> and are directly included in the source archive, instead.
>
> [1]
> https://cygwin.com/cgit/cygwin-apps/cygport/commit/?id=0b0066f3e778f760ca36a4454fe52eb603f9cf9d
>
> > Downgrading diffutils to 3.10-1 solve the issue.
>
> I though this was a different change where there's a new (benign)
> warning in diff (about diff-ing against an empty or non-existent
> directory?) which leaks out through cygport (that I maybe need to work
> out how to squelch or avoid).
>
> But now you have me thinking that it's more serious than that?
Yes. For example, currently, the source package of bvi includes
bvi-1.4.2-1.cygwin.patch, however, it will be lost if the source
package is rebuild in current environment.
--
Takashi Yano <[email protected]>
--
Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
