On Aug  3 20:27, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> >> That would be either supplemental files with the hashes or some new .lst
> >> format which could/should use a different extension anyway since the
> >> transition period will be long.
> >
> > Why?  The transition period can be very much shortened if we do what
> > I wrote above.
> 
> People tend to not re-install their whole set of packages just because
> some new version of setup is announced,

Uhm?  If you download a new setup, but then don't update your packages,
why did you download the latest setup at all?  If you don't run this
new setup, you won't get new-style files.

> so I'm going to assume that for
> quite some time a mix of old and new .lst files (for instance) exists on
> the majority of installations and whatever we do (in cygcheck, say)
> needs to work with that.

1. Provide new versions of cygwin, cygcheck-dep and _autorebase
2. time passes (2 weeks or so)
3. Provide a new version of setup


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat