Re: [PATCH setup 00/10] Various setup patches

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1679 bytes --]

On Aug  3 21:52, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> >> 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.
> 
> The checksum information has to come from somewhere and that somewhere
> requires a package install or update.  Together with that new setup we might
> have an update of cygccheck and some unrelated packages that happen to
> have been rebuilt recently, but certainly not the whole distribution.

Why is that important?  The checksums will collect over time.

> >> 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
> 
> That doesn't cut it, unless you want to require the whole distribution
> to be rebuilt and everything re-installed with that change.  Cygwin10
> 1609 or something like that?  :-)

I don't think I understand what you're up to.  Why is it important
to add the extra information all at once?  And if that's the case,
couldn't we use a runonce postinstall script for that?


Corinna

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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]