Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2000/05/22/23:21:56
> Sure. Put version number strings in all of the .exe's that are
> installed. Then if tar file A wipes out an executable that was also in
> tar file B we don't rely on external, erroneous data about tar file A to
> make update decisions. That's a foolproof if impractical solution.
What about non-executables, like libraries or include files? That's
why I suggested a separate database of tarballs, files, and checksums.
Or at least sizes and timestamps.
> OK. The regression point is a good one. The current version of setup
> can't handle anything like this of course. You're talking about control
> from the download site which would be cool.
Yup. It will simplify setup, too.
> Setup doesn't know about versions or dates. It just knows about
> normalized strings of alphanumeric characters following a "-" and prior
> to a .tar.gz. It sorts based on those.
Right. It shouldn't have to know about that either; you either have
the "right" file (specified in the control file) or you don't.
> I just want "setup -u cygwin" to do the right thing as much as possible.
I think a central control file will solve the problem, and for *all*
the packages we distribute. Finding the time to write the code for
it, though...
> I think my next post to this mailing list will be on the subject
> of puppies and kittens. (Hint: I like them.)
Want two? I have first-hand experience with the meaning of "cat
fight" :-(
- Raw text -