Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:16:10 +0200
Message-ID: <3E804EAB0003EFBE@mss4n.bluewin.ch>
In-Reply-To:  <3E851593.4070805@ece.gatech.edu>
From: "Yann Crausaz" <yann_crausaz AT bluemail DOT ch>
Subject: Re: RPM-4.1 port to cygwin available
To: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hello,

I'm going to try and link setup.exe against librpm, to make it possible (and
"feasible" ;-)) setup.exe and rpm both to be reciprocly updated.

I'm diving, and I give news when I emerge (or drawn...)

>-- Message original --
>To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
>Subject: Re: RPM-4.1 port to cygwin available
>Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 22:40:03 -0500
>
>
>Peter Ring wrote:
>> There's substantial evidence that RPM based distribution of Cygwin is
>> feasible:
>> 
>>   http://www.holonlinux.com/product/xonwin/index.html
>> 
>> Just in case you don't read Japanese, go directly to the FTP site:
>> 
>>   ftp://xow.holonlinux.com/pub/XonWindows/
>
>PETER!
>
>(In case anyone was wondering, Peter was one of those hardy souls 
>working on porting rpm 'back in the day' -- IIRC Peter was working on 
>early 4.0.x versions...)
>
>Yes, an RPM-based cygwin is feasible -- but the last time I looked, most
>
>of the competitors said something like: "First do (X) to install a basic
>
>cygwin system, and then use this tarball of rpm.exe, run rpm --initdb, 
>then use rpm to install and/or update other parts of your system"
>
>Where (X) is "unpack a tarball" or "piggyback off setup.exe and only 
>install these three packages" or somesuch.
>
>While *feasible,* that's not really *practical* as a "complete" 
>distribution.  Further, none of the schemes out there were capable of 
>updating the cygwin dll itself -- because rpm.exe uses it.  Nor could 
>they update any other in-use files.
>
>However, things may have changed over the years. I dunno, and I'm too 
>lazy to check now. :-)
>
>Personally, I'd welcome an official setup-installable package providing

>rpm.  Here's why:
>   1) we'd probably see a number of folks -- those who don't want to 
>permanently maintain a package, but want to provide it for people to use
>
>-- who'd choose to pack their contribution as rpms.  (Preferably,  these
>
>ad-hoc rpms would go somewhere like /usr/local or /opt/ or ANYWHERE 
>except /usr and /usr/X11R6/ ).
>
>   2) as these numbers grow, folks might begin wondering how to (and 
>provding code for) help setup.exe and rpm coexist -- updating each 
>other's databases, maybe even linking setup.exe against librpm, etc etc.
>
>  Of course, this requires that someone really really smart figure out 
>the best way to create a "native" port of librpm -- that can still 
>figure out where /var/cache/rpm and /etc and suchlike are really located...
>
>On the other hand, that was Robert's idea behind providing the dpkg 
>stuff in setup-installable form, and the above sequence didn't happen 
>for deb...
>
>--Chuck
>
>
>
>--
>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/