From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12499 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2002 04:58:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 12484 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2002 04:58:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ripple.fruitbat.org) (66.80.62.153) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 2002 04:58:12 -0000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by ripple.fruitbat.org (8.10.2/8.8.8/PAC-1.3) id g6I4uxo11038 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:56:59 -0700 Received: from ming.fruitbat.org(192.168.1.2) by ripple.fruitbat.org via smap (V2.1/2.1+anti-relay+anti-spam) id xma011030; Wed, 17 Jul 02 21:56:02 -0700 Received: from gremlin.fruitbat.org (doctor@gremlin.fruitbat.org [192.168.1.4]) by ming.fruitbat.org (8.10.2/8.10.2/PAC-1.6) with ESMTP id g6I4u2L11355 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:56:02 -0700 Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 02:42:00 -0000 From: "Peter A. Castro" To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: New setup pre-release - feedback needed In-Reply-To: <023301c22d67$02fea740$d500a8c0@study2> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg01434.txt.bz2 On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Robert Collins wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Peter A. Castro" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:15 PM > > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, Robert Collins wrote: > > > > > We're coming up on a new release of setup.exe, with a number of user > > > interface enhancements to make it more obvious what setup is doing when it > > > 'pauses'. > > > > While I do like the status of knowing just what setup is scanning as part > > of the package loading process, it now takes much, much longer to load > > from an "Install from Local Directory" scenario :-) (up from 5 seconds to > > about 1 minute, 45 seconds). It's a kind of a rare scenario (I'm > > probably one of the few who keeps a full downloaded image of all of > > cygwin (kinda like a mirror site)), and it's not like I run setup more > > than once every few days, so it's an adequate trade-off for more status > > on the package load. > > This is actually the MD5 checking, not the feedback. (I implemented the > feedback so that we won't get 'setup takes forever on local installs' :} ). I'm curious, then (that and I've been staying up waaaay to late!). Is the MD5 checking new, or just the visual feedback with this version of setup? If only the visual feedback is new, then it appears Windows' graphic elements are slowing down the process. Any chance you can, you know, speed up Windows ? ;^) > > > It *should* be bug free, although there may be a minor bug with > > > autodetection of upgrades (we have one report, but no debugging info). > > > > I did some test installs and re/de-installs and it appears to work well. > > The only thing I did notice was that during the actual package > > installation part, the Progress bar is showing "full" when it's installed > > only about 3/4ths of the files from the package. I noticed this more > > with source packages than binaries, but did see it a few times with some > > binary-only package installs. It's really just a cosmetic thing and > > didn't seem to effect the actual installation. I view it as a reversal > > of the old '98% finished' phenomenon :-) > > Hmm. Thats strange - I suspect it's a race of some sort with the gui updates > (we have two threads for blocking IO operations - one to do the UI, one to > do the IO.) Nothing much has changed there, which is why it's strange. That is strange. But as long as nothing goes wrong as a result, it doesn't matter too much. > Thanks for the feedback, Sure thing! > Rob -- Peter A. Castro or "Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/