X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4AEFB41E.3080609@gmail.com>
References:	<4AEAD9EE DOT 4010009 AT gamr7 DOT com> <20091030125852 DOT GB1361 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4AEBA0D2 DOT 5060001 AT gmail DOT com> <20091031024002 DOT GA19570 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4AEBBED1 DOT 6070802 AT gmail DOT com> <20091031152025 DOT GA22041 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4AEE510F DOT 3050707 AT gmail DOT com> <20091102134859 DOT GC9072 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4AEFB41E DOT 3080609 AT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:25:14 -0600
Message-ID:	<4a89b8680911030825m5d58efb8o25f1e8598f47a6c6@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: Parallel downloading of Cygwin packages
From:	paul DOT hermeneutic AT gmail DOT com
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 22:39, Chris Cormie <cjcormie AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 02:25:03PM +1100, Chris Cormie wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are barriers to implementing rpm in Cygwin, the most frequently
>>>> mentioned being the fact that a cygwin process can't easily replace
>>>> cygwin1.dll or any other running executables.
>>>
>>> If the in-Cygwin package manager can't update core Cygwin, that's not a
>>> deal breaker IMO: there is a fair bit of useful app package management that
>>> can be done without changing the core.
>>
>> Maybe it's not clear but your personal needs are not really the issue
>> here.

I thought that the standard Windows procedure was to create a run-once
to do the replacement after the machine is rebooted.  Would that not
work here?

Yes, it would be much nicer to do things better than Microsoft, but
that is the current structure.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -