Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<3BF2EF6E.560EF0D0@wapme-systems.de>
Date:	Wed, 14 Nov 2001 23:25:50 +0100
From:	Stipe Tolj <tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de>
Organization:	Wapme Systems AG
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [de]C-CCK-MCD QXW0322b (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language:	de,en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
CC:	cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: [FYI] file conflicts in recent Cygwin packages (see syscheck.log)
References:	<3BF2982D DOT 3D963F7C AT wapme-systems DOT de> <035401c16d4b$c2127990$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>

Robert,

> > I think these file conflicts should be resolved so the packages are
> > consistent. That's why I'm posting this.
> 
> Agreed.

who is going to advice the package maintainers to check for these file
conflicts?!

> > BTW, we may include dependance checking using setup.ini and setup.hint
> > information for the single packages while file conflicts are detected.
> > If you don't mind I will include this to the script.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean here, can you explain further?

The script I wrote may check file conflicts based upon package
dependancies, i.e. the require field of setup.ini and setup.hint. By
that way we may distinguiss which file conflicts are "less" paranoid
(if the corresponding packages are dependable) or "more" paranoid (if
they are loosely or none related).

It would only proclaim which file conflicts seem to be very easily
resolveable and which ones are related because of package dependance.

> > Another script is used to traverse the distribution tree and convert
> > all .tar.gz to .tar.bz2 which is obviously the better compression tool
> > here.
> 
> This is wrong. It's up to the package maintainer to choose .tar.gz or
> .tar.bz2, and if the package is going to be changed the cygwin version
> suffix MUST be bumped.

is this defined such a way in /setup.html?! I would suggest .bz2
because of compression performance. 

The main problem is defined as follows: how much control should/must
the package maintainer have and how much post-ante abilities should
the Cygwin projects (as general subject) have to prune or normalize
the packages, like the decission to use .bz2 instead of gzip?!

The best way would be to proclaim rules. I suppose /setup.html does
this in general, so it is up to the maintainer here?

Stipe

tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG

Münsterstr. 248
40470 Düsseldorf

Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299

E-Mail: info AT wapme-systems DOT de
Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
wapme.net - wherever you are

- Raw text -