Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:06:23 -0400 Message-Id: <200006212006.QAA16648@envy.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: pedwards AT disaster DOT jaj DOT com CC: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com In-reply-to: <200006211959.PAA05595@disaster.jaj.com> (message from Phil Edwards on Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:59:24 -0400) Subject: Re: setup vs setup 1.48, and the cygwin.bat file References: <200006211959 DOT PAA05595 AT disaster DOT jaj DOT com> > 1) When I went to retrieve "the latest version" of setup.exe, I saw > that the current setup.exe has a version of 1.45.something, but has a > newer timestamp than setup-1.48.exe. I tried searching the mailing list > archives for mentions of setup-1.48.exe to see what the story was, but > the search engine ignored the numbers. So, which one should we be using? 1.48 is experimental. It has lots of new goodies, but is missing a few key routines Chris added to his version. So, try 1.48 and see if it works (and let us know!), and if it doesn't, use setup.exe instead. > 2) Running setup to get /any/ packages always rewrites the cygwin.bat file. > Unfortunately, I have to edit that file in order to make cygwin > useful[0]. I've been thinking[1] of patching setup to only write > the file under certain conditions, but that raises the question: > when does that file need to be recreated, and when can we skip it? > (I am not a cygwin expert.) Why not just rename the file *you* use, and ignore the one setup creates? -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com