Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2002/03/29/12:43:20

Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:43:10 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: more and base
Message-ID: <>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA76008ABEB AT itdomain003 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <3CA49069 DOT 9070209 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 11:03:53AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Robert Collins wrote:
>>>> Can we remove more from base?
>>> More is what? 3k? I'd love to have had it in the base install  when
>>>  I installed my cygwin -
>> I support having a pager in the default install (which !=
>> base!!!!!!!)
>Base: cygwin is non-functional and completely broken(*) unless each and
>every package in Base is installed.
>'more' is not a requirement for a functioning cygwin installation.
>Therefore it shouldn't go in Base.  (Yes, there are a few other packages
>in Base that probably don't belong there, but that's an issue for
>another day).

Ok.  I thought that the consensus was for more to be in Base.  I didn't
think it should go their either but I thought I was the only one arguing
against it.  I've removed it from Base.


- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019