Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/11/01/22:43:56
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 07:15:57PM -0800, Joshua Franklin wrote:
>> Here's what you need to do. Subscribe to cygwin-apps
>OK, I've done that and am moving the discussion there.
>
>>This is the same bug as has been reported twice.
>Sorry, I'm suscribed with the digest version. I should have waited
>until the next digest came in to avoid 'me too's.
>
>>>Also, this pertains to what I say below, but shellutils really ought to
>>>be in "base" so /etc/profile can do $(id -un)
>>This is a packaging issue, setup.exe is data driven
>So cygwin should depend on bash and shellutils.
How do you figure that? It sounds like bash should depend
on shellutils. I don't see any need for circular dependencies.
>>rxvt and tcsh are not part of base, and should not be. Where do you
>>suggest they go if not in shells?
>ash, bash, and tcsh are shells. rxvt is I guess an xterm. So we need
>an "xterm" (more confusion about X11) or "misc" or something. Is that
>"utils" category from Debian as Chris mentioned? Is there a URL for
>this Debian packages standard we are ripping off? Or could stuff like
>clear and rxvt be lumped in "misc"?
I got the debian package list from the debian distribution,
somewhere. Don't remember where exactly.
>>>newlib-man doesn't cut it. Put it in devel.
>>It is a documentation package isn't it?
>So it man, then. What's it doing in "base" (see below about "base")?
>I suggested devel since all the pages are in man 3.
If newlib-man is in "Base" then that's a bug in setup.exe. It is
supposed to be in "Doc" according to setup.ini.
>>>Lastly, I think the description of rxvt is misleading. It sounds like
>>>you need X11, and doesn't highlight at all it's small size or that it
>>>can replace the DOS window.
>>
>>Good point.
>Does this means it'll get changed? (I'm assuming the rxvt maintainer
>reads this list.)
He does read the list. I hope that he hasn't submitted a better
description that I missed when I generated setup.ini. I agree that
the current description is misleading.
It does raise the whole X11 issue, though. I'd like to include the
X11 stuff in setup.exe, too. Should we wait until we've ironed out
all of the bugs here first and then ask them what they want or should
we start making noises about this now in cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com?
cgf
- Raw text -