Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: A bug (?) in the current setup.exe 2.78.2.15 From: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> To: bkeener AT thesoftwaresource DOT com Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com In-Reply-To: <VA.0000099b.00487bbe@thesoftwaresource.com> References: <001201c163a7$5d1610e0$6fc82486 AT medschool DOT dundee DOT ac DOT uk> <3BE2E375 DOT EB32B4E4 AT syntrex DOT com> <1004744797 DOT 9054 DOT 65 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <VA DOT 0000099b DOT 00487bbe AT thesoftwaresource DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/0.15 (Preview Release) Date: 04 Nov 2001 11:44:27 +1100 Message-Id: <1004834668.4708.48.camel@lifelesswks> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Nov 2001 00:48:45.0500 (UTC) FILETIME=[752ADFC0:01C164CA] On Sun, 2001-11-04 at 05:20, Brian Keener wrote: > Robert Collins wrote: > > Does this imply that the older file is explicitly marked as TEST > > somewhere? > > I'm not sure if it has to do totally with TEST, and I think you could get the > same problem with CURR VS TEST or CURR VS PREV. I believe it is simply a > matter of the first available hole and we plug in a higher version number - but > I haven't look at the most recent code but I have played with it in the past. Ah, that jibes with what Chris said in his patch. I think I see it now. > > As for that algo, yes it sounds buggy to me. I think the solution should > > be that if a package has no explicit trust (we have to guess at > > prev/curr/test) and it's greater than the version in TEST and its a > > locally scanned file, we just ignore it. That or replace the current > > TEST item with the new greater versioned one. > > I always wanted to modify the logic in the scan_downloaded files such that it > reorganized the files in the structure (prev,current,test) based on the version > numbers - sort of ignoring what setup.ini had for prev, curr, and test. Bear > in mind here - I am only referring to when you install from local directory not > the install from internet or download from internet options. k. > When you install from the internet or download from the internet - there is no > reason to be adding files from the hard disk to the structure. Installing from Actually, there may be. It allows a nice 'merged' view of the packages available. It would be sad to lose that. > the internet should be based on setup.ini and download from the internet (in my > opinion) should be based on what is available according to setup.ini and does > not exist on my hard drive already and then also give you the option of > redownloading from the internet the files that exist on your hard drive that > setup knows about. Sounds neat... Added to the wishlist (and patches are gratefully accepted) :]. Rob -- 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/