From: "Dave Korn" <dave DOT korn AT artimi DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: Problems after upgrading to 1.5.19-4
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:58:11 -0000
Message-ID: <074201c643b3$cafc09c0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <060201c643b0$db283bf0$0201a8c0@homelarrie>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 09 March 2006 19:37, Larrie Carr wrote:

> Sure I RTFM'ed and yes it says that.  But I would argue that Keep does not
> exactly work the way that you say it does.  So not using Keep does not
> indicate RTFM status.

  Well, since keep ABSOLUTELY DOES work EXACTLY how I described it, you really
need not only to RTFM, but also to ACTUALLY TRY this stuff out before you
pontificate.

> If you select a new uninstalled package within the category page before
> hitting Keep, then hitting Keep will deselect the newly selected package.

  Yes.  That's what "Keep" means.  It "Keep"s things as they are.  If "the way
that they are" is "uninstalled", then "Keep"ing it the same way it is means
not installing it.  That's why I told you to hit "Keep" first and THEN select
the package.

  Do you really believe that doing things backwards in time should make no
difference to how they turn out?  If I told you to boil the kettle, then pour
the water into the teapot, would you write back saying "Well, what you said
doesn't work because if I pour the water into the teapot first and then boil
the kettle I get a lousy cold cup of tea"?  Well, that's what you've just
done.  I can't help people who are unaware that time is directional.

> It probably something about going from Cur version of the package (which was
> just selected) to the Keep version (which isn't "install" - so what you just
> selected to install just got deselected).

  This line is incoherent.  Of course "the Keep version" isn't "install".  I
can only guess what you mean, because "install" isn't a version at all, it's
an action, but the "Keep" 'version' would be "not installed", because that's
what the status of the package is at the moment when you clicked "Keep".

> If you hit Keep as a mid or last
> step, it has unexpected consequences (and a lot of "Nothing to install"
> messages).  

  If you hit Keep as a mid or last step - OR AT ANY TIME, OR AS ANY STEP, it
has EXPECTED consequences: it sets every package to KEEP it's
currently-installed version.  Just because /you/ expected something else
utterly bizarre to happen doesn't undermine this.

>  The manual method describe above WFM.

  Yes, it does work, but as you were saying, it is inconvenient awkward and
difficult, or have you forgotten that?  Let me just remind you how the
conversation has been going:

you:  Setup has problems, look at this awkward procedure "X" I have to undergo
to achieve result "Y".
me:   You don't have to do that, it's far easier, just do this "Z" instead.
you:  I tried doing something else that wasn't "Z" and it didn't work how i
expected it to so "X" is better.

  At this point I want to start banging my head against the wall.
 
> Again, I understand the your choice of default and am not arguing to change
> it.  I'm just saying that it can cause problems for non-newbie uses trying
> to do version control.

  You aren't "trying to do version control".  You're trying to use a piece of
software without having RTFMd.

>>  Of course, the /real/ real answer is that if you're concerned with
>> stability and reliability and certification and validity and things like
>> that, you MUST set up your own in-house cygwin mirror server, and you
>> should only ever add new packages to it when you're sure they're good, and
>> then all the in-house users can run setup as much as they like, and there
>> will only /be/ new packages and no updated old packages.  That gives you
>> *total* control over your environment. 
>> 
> 
> This I agree with and right now, it's a decision on the bubble.  The
> original intent was to have one installation on the network.

  Good luck.  It's absolutely the way to go when you really want to have
repeatable, reliable configurations; you've got to have the whole thing under
your control in order to decouple your software systems from the vagaries of
day-to-day work on the externally-source software.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
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/