Mail Archives: cygwin/2011/02/01/16:11:21
A previous reply informed me that libjpeg62 may be included as an=20
obsolete package. I have not checked that out, so the discussion=20
including the following should be understood in that context. I have=20
not checked whether it actually is available that way.
I deliberately omitted the identity of the actual provider, since this=20
mailinglist is so widely read. Send me a private email-address and I=20
shall provide you with the information.
The missing presence of X and xinit I experienced by use of 'which' and=20
making certain that these were commands in a 1.5-version that is running=20
on another computer. In fact I looked in vain for a folder with=20
binaries for X. I then switched provider, used an unmodified selection=20
of packages and checked that the two commands were present in a relevant=20
folder. I have not yet the X-server running.
I used the search facility of setup.exe with libjpeg to find packages,=20
none of them showed libjpeg6.2 and subsequently checked with the=20
complete name. This was the behaviour observed with two different=20
providers. I was not aware of means to disclose obsolete packages.
Another experience that emerge from this discussion is that it seems=20
very hard to be believed. It is also very hard to document the details=20
of what goes on during installation. Please take than into account when
you take this as a support experience, which certainly is in line with=20
my intentions.
Do not forget to send a non-mailinglist email-address for information=20
about which providers I have experienced. You may then decide, if the=20
information should be published here.
You might of course also emphasize your doubts of my credibility, if you=20
want to close the actual discussion.
J=F8rgen
On 01/02/2011 19:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 07:13:51PM +0100, J??rgen Steensgaard wrote:
>> Thanks for the guidance. But: yes, I refer to a provider on the list of
>> mirrors found in setup.exe; and yes, I realise the difficulty to ensure
>> consistency and the urge to put responsibilities on mirror owners. Some
>> mechanism of mirror authorisation is in my opinion needed.
>
> As previously mentioned, we already have that.
>
>> Is the original distribution available to common users? Or at least
>> details of the contents? If not, I have no reference system and cannot
>> identify derivations?
>>
>> Do remember that the impressions left by inconsistencies will stick also
>> on the original -- which is actually fair.
>
> How about if we treat your problem as a support experience rather than a
> call to redesign all of the mirror handling?
>
> You have not provided such basic details as:
>
> What, exactly, did you select when installing that would lead you to
> believe that you should have had X programs installed? What mirror did
> you use? What error message did you receive when you tried to install
> xinit but found it unavailable?
>
> I have a very hard time believing that you found official cygwin mirrors
> which did not have the libjpeg62 package but, if you did, we'd certainly
> like to know which ones are in error.
>
> cgf
>
--
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 -