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 Subject: Re: Ideas re problem reporting From: Robert Collins To: cygwin@cygwin.com In-Reply-To: <20030716033302.GA6050@redhat.com> References: <20030716002142.E1F2434381@nevin.research.canon.com.au> <20030716033302.GA6050@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-FSd7GvLBjBnE9rxArtRh" Message-Id: <1058333460.3403.303.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: 16 Jul 2003 15:31:00 +1000 --=-FSd7GvLBjBnE9rxArtRh Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote: > cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output > from cycheck doesn't include package information, then the packages > weren't installed via setup.exe. I've seen at least one script that (badly) reverse engineered setup's db files and attempts to create compatible ones. However, a registry entry won't correct this: only the user knows exactly what tool they used, unless we go down some insane DRM style path - and I won't be taking setup down that path. Rob --=20 GPG key available at: . --=-FSd7GvLBjBnE9rxArtRh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/FOMTI5+kQ8LJcoIRAmdAAJ9TRSFBcXbj4UYm7Uj6psgMUxBOHQCfQ0vv cmMpOIwQDHqg5CI9dtw+2EE= =UvtU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-FSd7GvLBjBnE9rxArtRh--