| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
| DomainKey-Signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
| :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
| :list-help:sender:subject:references:to:reply-to:from:message-id | |
| :date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type | |
| :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=M5V/LwPA2DKC1PDP | |
| 2Q3nkTVZg/EAd4sSyp+kcCALaBFW1NEsmYQ8dj7c82QUcQc2KxyRFCAUioKLfz2v | |
| EKgTxmkj4l9Uw3+UInV9ejfskD1pGS5HH+qb1OihkYnKh4W1F9cN22gDzeD++fit | |
| laywBKqWsNT4aQi8+R+CCRGJKuk= | |
| DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
| :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
| :list-help:sender:subject:references:to:reply-to:from:message-id | |
| :date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type | |
| :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=zs8H3P6WiD2//km17UkVwE | |
| 0gGaI=; b=dsQ0dxXbXjs0StcnIbfjR36QtfuRC/CXlwLwQj679gQ6lA0uh62I6W | |
| CeTZZk6UClVaJSaGqJfUv7GqLJqPETDRoFq9PLlnAImUGy5wsvmmBQU5GWXRrEPV | |
| kkluhfa5IuHYBi93DdGsCjquREajfl9sgSWyYROomxKjxC80QvXAg= | |
| Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
| List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.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 |
| Authentication-Results: | sourceware.org; auth=none |
| X-Virus-Found: | No |
| X-Spam-SWARE-Status: | No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=calgary, Hx-spam-relays-external:shaw.ca, H*r:shaw.ca, HX-HELO:sk:smtp-ou |
| X-HELO: | smtp-out-no.shaw.ca |
| X-Authority-Analysis: | v=2.2 cv=JLBLi4Cb c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=WqCeCkldcEjBO3QZneQsCg==:117 a=WqCeCkldcEjBO3QZneQsCg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=w_pzkKWiAAAA:8 a=rFSrpKcQU-gqC0k_aaAA:9 a=nc9EFkV3Rvxlbotu:21 a=sSssSgQmP9osgEwS:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=6kGIvZw6iX1k4Y-7sg4_:22 a=sRI3_1zDfAgwuvI8zelB:22 |
| Subject: | Re: Installer names not meaningful enough |
| References: | <CAG-pUxkQ_iniFA0r9i2zkT1uFMEvCei0wc9rd45RBYj2uBnVhA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <d7f8f9e5-e77d-8dde-8882-15084904cbe0 AT mitel DOT com> <ba495ad3-5e70-0edf-7958-24644e905963 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> <93ce058d-79e6-a213-1b6f-1ec3438b71c4 AT gmail DOT com> <5d61771c-00e8-9adb-58ff-8094bf12e550 AT gmail DOT com> <FC2C0B09-B862-4061-A2AC-598423D0CA05 AT yahoo DOT com> <20161205173630 DOT GA1749 AT fedora DOT wp DOT comcast DOT net> |
| To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
| Reply-To: | Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSw DOT ab DOT ca |
| From: | Brian Inglis <Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSw DOT ab DOT ca> |
| Message-ID: | <9c407e66-0775-a183-c168-6e7fd4e0e741@SystematicSw.ab.ca> |
| Date: | Mon, 5 Dec 2016 12:05:43 -0700 |
| User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To: | <20161205173630.GA1749@fedora.wp.comcast.net> |
| X-CMAE-Envelope: | MS4wfDa2zGTQ1Inw8/w3LQNFuTKjfbAUW7+g9mynrgwQMoyKus1WFEr+CtMriduJR9+7wYRAVWssBtTQEQZYBerSRill9HizYXaFWXzS3HJgLX1GufnnAXDg TKBLtjFxmPeUw91QxyTlJWOzhJy2Ct7goVUUWfqY09kMjVWfxNpMOE6oBNFn7ryR9wvjLKeuFmBpsQ== |
| X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
On 2016-12-05 10:36, Stephen Paul Carrier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 11:37:41AM -0500, Ian Lambert wrote: >> On December 1, 2016 8:54:57 AM EST, cyg Simple <cygsimple AT gmail DOT com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12/1/2016 8:25 AM, Vlado wrote: >>>> On 1.12.2016 13:51, Eliot Moss wrote: >>>>> I think that including the version of the setup program could be >>> helpful >>>>> - I tend >>>>> to add it (renaming the file by hand). However, clearly we've lived >>>>> with things this >>>>> way for a long time ... >>> >>> More than a score years. >>> >>>> >>>> I disagree. >>>> I have a script to update Cygwin. This script checks for new version >>> of >>>> setup, downloads, verifies signature, etc. Things would become much >>> more >>>> complicated with variable setup file name. >>>> Finally: Why should I care about the exact version number of setup? >>>> Script makes backups of the old setup files like setup.exe.0001, >>> 0002, >>>> ..., just for a cause, but never in the past I did have to looking >>> for >>>> the setup with exact version number. >>>> >>> >>> The only reason would be if you had an older version of the .ini file. >>> When the data prerequisites of the .ini file change there is a new >>> version of setup to handle that. > > Right, and the way to learn if this is the case is to run setup. I learn > that a new version is available by running the old version. > > Running setup is also the way to find out what is the version. > > I don't mind renaming the file myself, but would really appreciate any > way to know from the cygwin.com front page exactly which version of the > setup-*.exe is on offer. (The current version of Cygwin DLL is useful, > but not the same thing.) You can get the Setup version by installing upx and running: cp -fp $DIR/setup-x86*.exe /tmp/setup && \ upx -dqqq /tmp/setup && \ egrep -ao '%%%\ssetup-version\s[.0-9]+' /tmp/setup | \ sed 's/%%%\ssetup-version\s//' && \ rm -f /tmp/setup -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada -- 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
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |