Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: A bug (?) in the current setup.exe 2.78.2.15
From:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	bkeener AT thesoftwaresource DOT com
Cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<VA.0000099b.00487bbe@thesoftwaresource.com>
References:	<001201c163a7$5d1610e0$6fc82486 AT medschool DOT dundee DOT ac DOT uk>
	<3BE2E375 DOT EB32B4E4 AT syntrex DOT com> <1004744797 DOT 9054 DOT 65 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
	<VA DOT 0000099b DOT 00487bbe AT thesoftwaresource DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Evolution/0.15 (Preview Release)
Date:	04 Nov 2001 11:44:27 +1100
Message-Id:	<1004834668.4708.48.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	04 Nov 2001 00:48:45.0500 (UTC) FILETIME=[752ADFC0:01C164CA]

On Sun, 2001-11-04 at 05:20, Brian Keener wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > Does this imply that the older file is explicitly marked as TEST
> > somewhere?
> 
> I'm not sure if it has to do totally with TEST, and I think you could get the 
> same problem with CURR VS TEST or CURR VS PREV.  I believe it is simply a 
> matter of the first available hole and we plug in a higher version number - but 
> I haven't look at the most recent code but I have played with it in the past.

Ah, that jibes with what Chris said in his patch. I think I see it now.

> > As for that algo, yes it sounds buggy to me. I think the solution should
> > be that if a package has no explicit trust (we have to guess at
> > prev/curr/test) and it's greater than the version in TEST and its a
> > locally scanned file, we just ignore it. That or replace the current
> > TEST item with the new greater versioned one.
> 
> I always wanted to modify the logic in the scan_downloaded files such that it 
> reorganized the files in the structure (prev,current,test) based on the version 
> numbers - sort of ignoring what setup.ini had for prev, curr, and test.  Bear 
> in mind here - I am only referring to when you install from local directory not 
> the install from internet or download from internet options.

k.
 
> When you install from the internet or download from the internet - there is no 
> reason to be adding files from the hard disk to the structure.  Installing from 

Actually, there may be. It allows a nice 'merged' view of the packages
available. It would be sad to lose that.

> the internet should be based on setup.ini and download from the internet (in my 
> opinion) should be based on what is available according to setup.ini and does 
> not exist on my hard drive already and then also give you the option of 
> redownloading from the internet the files that exist on your hard drive that 
> setup knows about.

Sounds neat... Added to the wishlist (and patches are gratefully
accepted) :].

Rob


--
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/

- Raw text -