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 sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com From: "Alex Malinovich" To: Subject: RE: On Cygwin package naming and a setup.exe bug Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:58:57 -0500 Message-ID: <000101c130b4$491230e0$0800a8c0@TheLoveShack.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2526.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <017d01c130ad$7985eca0$0d76aec7@D4LHBR01> Last time I checked, the only working version of RPM for Cygwin was 3. (If memory serves.) And I haven't heard too much discussion from people who are willing to do modifications to it to make the newer versions work with cygwin. Though I'd imagine that if a developer writing a cygwin app wanted to make a v3 RPM and distrubute it that way (with information on where to get the latest working Cygwin version of RPM) it would work. As for the actual OFFICIAL cygwin distribution, I have no idea. I'd imagine that having setup.exe no one is quite inclined to scrap it in favor of a completely new setup scheme. That's just pure speculation on my part however. -Alex > -----Original Message----- > From: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com > [mailto:cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com] On Behalf Of Michael F. March > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:08 PM > To: John Marshall; cygwin AT cygwin DOT com > Subject: Re: On Cygwin package naming and a setup.exe bug > > > Is there a reason why all the packages for Cygwin are not > managed via RPM instead of these compressed tar balls? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:20 AM > Subject: Re: On Cygwin package naming and a setup.exe bug > > > Christopher Faylor wrote: > > If I make an RPM, that does not mean that said RPM is now > an official > > part of the Red Hat distribution. It means that it is a > Red Hat Package > > Manager file. > > Right. It's not an official part of the Red Hat distribution. But it > *is* conveniently installable by the "rpm" tool, or any other > tool used > to install Red Hat Package Manager packages. > > > Hmm. Now you've got it. So, why the above confusion? > > Perhaps you can suggest a succinct name for "tar file > containing programs > that use Cygwin and installable by Cygwin's setup.exe". > Clearly the words > I used ("Cygwin package", by comparison with "RPM package") > are causing > people who already use those words for something else a lot > of confusion. > > > [Random packages from Al Buonanno, Joe Blaupunkt, and Irene > Trumbauer > > aren't official parts of the Cygwin distribution.] > > Okay, I think I get your point. > > >> As Charles > >> suggested, I can call the file prc-tools-cygwin-2.1.tar.gz > > > > Actually, I suggested that. I don't understand why this is > horrible. > > Both you and Charles suggested this one. (I'm surprised you don't see > why it is not as nice as it could be.) > > John > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > > -- > 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/ > > > -- > 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/ > > > -- 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/