Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/05/16/20:12:36
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 08:04:42AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>>On the other hand, would it be a good idea for setup.exe to tag its
>>directories in some way, like with a zero-byte file, so that it doesn't
>>take just any old setup.ini file it finds?
>
>Mmmm. I'll think about this. I don't want to interfere with users
>using mirroring tools.
I think this is really not a great idea. The "local directory" that
setup.exe uses is supposed to be only for that purpose. Adding zero
length files for people who don't get the concept seems like the wrong
way to go.
Especially since I can easily see the "setup.exe is creating zero length
files!!! How I stop this????" comments here.
There really has to be a limit on how much we coddle people who make
bad decisions, IMO.
On the other hand, having setup.exe complain when someone specifies an
existing populated directory that has no setup.ini files in it, might
not be a bad idea. I think that something like this would be a great
idea for some intrepid setup.exe patcher.
Another plan would be not to parse any setup.ini file that was missing
both of the setup-*: options.
cgf
--
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 -