Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Rolf Campbell Subject: Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!) Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:36:18 -0500 Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <1048679085.9951.11.camel@localhost> <1048715095.9946.43.camel@localhost> <1048910422.1197.40.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <1048910422.1197.40.camel@localhost> Robert Collins wrote: > > Regarding XFree auto-installation... >>Cygwin Package Information > > ... > >>libPropList 0.10.1-3 > > > This requires XFree86-base. So setup is doing the right thing. > > Rob Well, unistalling that makes this setup work the same as the old setup. So, does this setup do dependancy analysis different than the old one? I would guess that this new one tries to install anything that is depended on and not already installed, where-as the old one only checks when you are installing the original package? -Rolf -- 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/