Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/06/05/23:35:41
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 07:05:46PM -0700, Michael A. Chase wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
>To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 16:16
>Subject: Re: Setup 2.57 woes...
>
>> On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 04:37:11AM -0700, Michael A. Chase wrote:
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "David Starks-Browning" <starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk>
>> >To: "Michael A. Chase" <mchase AT ix DOT netcom DOT com>
>> >Cc: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
>> >Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 02:31
>> >Subject: Re: Setup 2.57 woes...
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Monday 4 Jun 01, Michael A. Chase writes:
>> >>>The final comment in that thread from Chris was that the FAQ is still
>> >>>correct. It's just that now that setup.exe honors existing mount
>> >>>points, someone who 'knows what their doing' can split /usr/bin/ and
>> >>>/bin/. If you mention that it is possible, you should also mention
>> >>>that it is strongly not recommended.
>> >>
>> >>I won't mention that it's possible to change anything. I will simply
>> >>remove the FAQ entry "Setup screwed up my mounts!" because it shouldn't
>> >>do that any more.
>> >
>> >I wouldn't take it out quite yet. The behavior when the user asks for
>> >a new Cygwin root hasn't been completely settled yet. It might change
>> >in a way that looks like the old behavior.
>>
>> How so? It should replace the root and leave other mounts alone.
>
>So it would be ok to go from
>
> / -> c:\cygwin\
> /usr/bin/ -> c:\cygwin\bin\
> /usr/lib/ -> c:\cygwin\lib\
> /c/ -> c:\
>
>to
>
> / -> c:\new_cygwin\
> /usr/bin/ -> c:\cygwin\bin\
> /usr/lib/ -> c:\cygwin\lib\
> /c/ -> c:\
>
>I would want to replace any mounts that are physically under / when
>installing to a new Cygwin root.
Why are you asking me a question that is easily verified by direct
observation? Do you want me to run setup.exe?
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -