Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<026a01c20e37$25a362d0$42a18c09@wdg.uk.ibm.com>
From:	"Max Bowsher" <maxb AT ukf DOT net>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<009401c20e33$db5b4d30$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
Subject:	Re: Crashing setup.exe
Date:	Fri, 7 Jun 2002 16:22:33 +0100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

robertc <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net> wrote:
> No. One SHOULD NOT TOUCH the cygwin packages directory. Setup reserves
> the right to do -anything- it wants to that dir, including zapping the
> content, moving files etc etc.

Setup has the right to use its package cache as it sees fit, but users of setup
have the right to manage setup's use of their hard disc. If everyone treated
package directories opaquely, they would never purge old versions of packages,
and sooner or later, we would all have 10GB package directories. The setup's
handling of its cache should be like the rest of cygwin - if you don't like it,
make a clean, debugged patch to change it, and provide a good argument to why it
should be applied.

I appreciate you are trying to prevent aimless discussion, but setup's cache
_cannot_ be a black box.

Max.




--
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 -