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
X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: ronald set sender to blytkerchan AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net using -f
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 18:58:33 +0200
From: Ronald Landheer-Cieslak <blytkerchan AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
To: David Balazic <david DOT balazic AT hermes DOT si>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Less fails with link error
Message-ID: <20030806165833.GH18441@linux_rln.harvest>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <600B91D5E4B8D211A58C00902724252C01BC02BB AT piramida DOT hermes DOT si>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <600B91D5E4B8D211A58C00902724252C01BC02BB@piramida.hermes.si>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Disclaimer: I had nothing to do with it - I swear!
X-loop: linux_rln.harvest

On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:07:32PM +0200, David Balazic wrote:
> > Cycling through the versions is a dangerous thing these days - you should
> > only
> Is there any other way to get from some version selection back to "Skip" ?
> If it is dangerous, then it should be disabled or accompanied with a
> warning.
Nope - but you usually don't want to do that :) - you only want to do that if
what you have is working..

> > do it if you know what you're doing. The version Setup proposes is the one
> > you
> > should normally use, because it's the one the maintainer wants you to use.
> > The
> > maintainer is usually right about what you should use..
> There was no note saying that the maintainer prefers one version over
> another.
> They all were offered to choose from.
Of course, but the one proposed by default by Setup is the one the maintainer
prefers.. otherwise, Setup would propose something else..

> > > > You used Setup to install, didn't you?
> > > yes.
> > > > Use cygcheck to get the version of less, then :)
> > > I llearned something new.
> > > rpm would catch the incompatibility though :-)
> > versioned dependencies in Setup are a work-in-progress *and* require the 
> > maintainers to put them in the setup.hint files. Neither is magic.
> > 
> > IIRC, rpm doesn't use any wizzardry either: versioned dependencies are the
> > maintainer's job.
> > 
> > As for the state of progress on versioned dependencies in Setup (before
> > you 
> > ask) IIRC it needs testing more than anything else - but one of the Setup
> > people will surely correct me if I'm wrong..
> > 
> Well I guess I just tested it :-)
Nope, you didn't, unless you added the versioned dependency to setup.hint, 
regenerated setup.ini, etc.

cgf asked this thread to stop - let's do that :)

rlc

-- 
Beam me up, Scotty!  It ate my phaser!

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/