Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <032501c1a851$7bb4ac20$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: , References: <200201281959 DOT OAA18097 AT cs DOT umb DOT edu> Subject: Re: New setup.exe and crashes Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 10:14:05 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jan 2002 23:13:58.0661 (UTC) FILETIME=[77129B50:01C1A851] ----- Original Message ----- From: "John P. Rouillard" > >I've uploaded a new setup.exe that shouldn't crash on *anything*. If you > >have time please give it a shot. > > I have successfully used it to download and install openssh from > http://mirrors.rcn.net with WinNT 4.0SP5. With the previous setup > snapshot that url caused a crash. Excellent. > Also it looks like the new setup has a nice feature and can update in > use binaries (I was using ssh at the time of the successful update > above). However I can't find the registry entry that is used to move > the new ssh.exe on top of the old one at (re-)boot time. So exactly > how does the new install do its magic? "Any sufficiently advanced technol...." :]. The source is your guide, but essentially itjust calls MoveFileEx with the correct flags on NT, and on 9x creates a .ini file to tell windows to do the copies at boot time. > I had gotten used to having updates on running packages fail, might it > be a good idea to offer an option "Update running programs (requires > reboot)" in one of the screens. That way we could safely update the > packages we aren't using without having to reboot. Yes, there is more to do here - a list of what programs are in use and the ability to wait for them to be closed would also be useful :}. Patches gratefully accepted, meanwhile we are making progress. > Actually this begs the question, what happened when install failed due > to in use binaries? Before? You got left with the old binary (couldn't be deleted) and no package, or sometimes the new package files with one old file. Rather bad behaviour IMO. > Did it clean up after itself and reinstall the old > files, or was I left with a mix of file versions after the failed > update? I never had any problems after a failed update, so I always > assumed that it cleaned up and backed out the updated files. Was I > wrong? Very very wrong :}. It just failed. The resilience you saw is a credit to Cygwin and the packages - it could have been much worse :}. 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/