X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX184OvuT2OHPSDhycepa5jpx
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 13:28:05 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Recent upgrade to wish leads to a problem
Message-ID: <20120301182805.GD28713@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C3129F4CE5@xmb-sjc-233.amer.cisco.com> <20120301181416.GB28713@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <CA+sc5mnk9mkDUJb-4Kz2pRs8Vi-2iH7AD1pqqfOUg_nyojEzZg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+sc5mnk9mkDUJb-4Kz2pRs8Vi-2iH7AD1pqqfOUg_nyojEzZg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie.com@cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 09:54:23AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
>>>"Christopher Faylor" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
>>>> think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
>>>> please be assured that this will not happen.
>>>
>>>OK, what would cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something?
>>
>> There is nothing in what I wrote which would suggest that adding xinit as
>> a dependency was a possibility.
>
>I agree with Matt.  If TK is requiring the use of the X server then
>the X server should be a package dependency of TK.  It wasn't a
>dependency before because the X server wasn't needed but now the X
>server is needed to use TK.

TK does not require an X server running on the same system.  This has
been explained in this very thread.

If you have points to make, don't make them with a <aol>"me too"</aol>
unless you're planning on addressing the issues that Yaakov raised.
Otherwise you're just wasting bandwidth.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple