DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to
	:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=SZi+h
	fbMnU//CiqO269VFAcaOYp+e72IADyU8EaDCHrXWnSnWLeDXQ7HsOktJDxIOgpyz
	n9S0w8cF8eOD7AaUXU/XMgLX1mAICNouiQldXU1p9jb7d9GSTp1LVyQdWYtqJOAp
	j7UW3f0WZVs3Nms+xwwdSk5FGDo4F0M6fNX70Q=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Blocking a base package from installing
References: <CAGHJv4cPr2Pe31nBg+KZ1nbODGtb977NOxOHgXyd89xEY2uh0g@mail.gmail.com>	<878tu1qtes.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <57F6966E.4050303@tlinx.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 21:01:52 +0200
In-Reply-To: <57F6966E.4050303@tlinx.org> (Linda Walsh's message of "Thu, 06	Oct 2016 11:22:38 -0700")
Message-ID: <874m4pqp27.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Linda Walsh writes:
>> 1. Build a proper package and give it a higher version number than
>> Cygwin's own Vim.  
>>
>> 2. Fake the installation of vim-minimal in /etc/setup/installed.db and
>> give that fake installation some high version number.
> ---
> Both of which are "lying" to the package manager, to get it to
> NOT install an inferior (from the standpoint of not containing
> the user-desired modifications/features) package.  It should
> be possible to "LOCK" a package (base or not), to prevent it from
> being removed/updated/installed or changed by setup, no?  

Not really, although there is some skipping of intermediate steps
involved.  By building your own package you introduce a second package
source (like Cygport does).  The two package sources can only coexist if
either the package versions are all different (note: version here
includes the "build number") or the package sets are disjunct and
dependencies are only present from the "second source" into the first.
If you were to change the packaging of an existing package in the base
package source, you'd have to provide obsolescence packages for those
packages you no longer provide content for.  The two suggestions just
produce the end result of doing that with different amounts of not
actually doing all the work that would be required (and if you break
your system you get to keep the pieces).

Now, that last question of yours: No, the package manager should never
allow you to not install a base package.  These are in category "Base"
precisely so the rest of the system can rely on the functionality
provided.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptation for Waldorf rackAttack V1.04R1:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada

--
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