Mail Archives: cygwin/2003/02/14/16:19:54
andrew clarke wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
>
>> Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because
>> it's described as a "work-in-progress" and seemingly a bit of a
>> moving target.
>
> Actually, just out of interest, will new Setup programs always be
> backward-compatible (within reason) with packages designed for old
> versions of Setup? The point being, a user should expect to be
> able to install an old .tar.bz2 file from a local directory using
> the latest version of Setup. If not, it should be recommended that
> users keep their old version of setup.exe (and not just overwrite
> it with the newest setup.exe) because the new version may not be able
> to install packages designed for the old version, because it's a
> work-in-progress.
The package format has never broken compatibility yet, and I don't think it
ever will.
> --08:06:16-- http://cygwin.com/setup.exe
>
> 4 Last-Modified: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 00:50:47 GMT
>
> Hmm, nobody is working on it after all?
Oh, lots of work has been going on, but all in CVS.
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 -