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 Message-ID: <3BE2BFC9.7E64E0DE@syntrex.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 16:46:17 +0100 From: Pavel Tsekov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fergus CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: A bug (?) in the current setup.exe 2.78.2.15 References: <001201c163a7$5d1610e0$6fc82486 AT medschool DOT dundee DOT ac DOT uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fergus wrote: > > Robert, > > The recent rapid evolution of setup.exe will, I am sure, result in a greatly > improved application with many felicitous enhancements. I hope you will not > mind a quick report of a one-off finding in the current setup.exe > v.2.78.2.15 which stands a much greater chance than it might otherwise have, > of being completely irrelevant. Sorry. But here goes, all the same ... > > On my 2nd Cygwin machine I do not have internet access and therefore > maintain locally a directory \Cyg0\, containing just the current file > setup.exe and current subdirectories contrib\ and latest\. These two > subdirectories are augmented as new or replacement files/folders are > downloaded (on to my 1st machine). Sometimes, until I clean up, there may be > redundant versions there too. > > Yes, that's right, no setup.ini. A deliberate oversight that seems to have > no detrimental consequences, for setup.exe seems to be remarkably > intelligent: selecting the option "Install from Local Directory", it clearly > manages to match (a) whatever the file /etc/setup/installed.db says I've got > installed, with (b) whatever a scan of \Cyg0\ and below says is available. I > have found that setup.exe _never_ wobbles in its update procedures, > accurately telling new from old and old from new ... > > ... except just this once: it seems to think that ash-20010827-1.tar.bz2 > provides an update to ash-20011018-1.tar.bz2, whereas the reverse is the > case. > > I just wondered whether there is something easily correctable in setup.exe's > number (date) recognition facility that you might find useful to incorporate > into your present efforts. You're allowed to tell me off for not using > setup.exe in the approved way (i.e. in association with setup.ini) by the > way - and you might even do this! - but, nevertheless, I hope there may be > an atom of useful information here. (I'm always interested in rendering > procedures, especially install procedures, as sparse as possible.) Can you provide a copy of install.log, install.log.full and /etc/setup/installed.db. Did you have the old version of ash installed (ash-20010827-1.tar.bz2) or you just had the two packeges in the installed directory ? -- 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/