Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Message-ID: <03ec01c18bff$cc3289b0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert.collins@itdomain.com.au>
To: <cygwin-apps@cygwin.com>, <cygwin@cygwin.com>
References: <02b801c18bb1$ad62f360$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> <20011223184328.GB21163@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Setup.exe snapshot
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 09:18:48 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 11:59:33PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >* Dependencies will only trigger installation of a package - they
won't
> >force an upgrade of an installed package. (with the caveat that in
the
> >future versioned dependencies may force upgrades).
>
> Isn't this what has consistently gotten us into trouble?  Why not
force
> an update of a package if a package that depends on it is being
upgraded?
> This seems more intuitive to me.

We've had at lsat one bug report of the opposite, where someone was
running a custom file and had to continually select skip.

The way setup now works, when the chooser is presented, all installed
packages will be updated. If I take the following steps:
package foo, change to prev/kepp
unselected package bar, change to curr
then foo will be left at prev/keep.

BY DEFAULT, foo would have been upgraded. And if the user deselected
foo, then select bar, foo-current would be installed.

> Also, if we have no way to install all packages, then I think this new
> release should be delayed.  We've been promising this for months.
>
> If all that we need, however, is for upset to add things to a "Full"
> category, which can be selected, I can do that.

This is last thing in my list of features before doing a release.

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/