To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
Subject:  Re: Eliminating -mno-cygwin from gcc.
Date:  Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:06:41 -0600
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <eq7kmh$f85$2@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <020d01c748b4$62d8b170$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <20070205030939 DOT GB24653 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <45C6A0DC DOT 3010104 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <20070205033101 DOT GE24653 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <45C6A793 DOT 8020008 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <45C6ABAB DOT 8030500 AT cygwin DOT com>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9) Gecko/20061206 Thunderbird/1.5.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0
In-Reply-To: <45C6ABAB.8030500@cygwin.com>
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

Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> The discussion has been to augment 'setup.exe' in a way as to provide users
> with feedback about "important" package changes in general.  It has come up
> in the context of the gcc change but would have to apply generally.
> "Important" would be defined by the maintainer by some mechanism.
> Presumably, every release of package 'foo' does not trigger the "important"
> flag. ;-)

Hmm, there might be a catch-22 here. How do we force people to update 
their setup.exe?

(What about a change that does not affect setup.exe itself? Maybe a 
package that most things depend on that allows a post-install script to 
display a dialog? Or was that the plan already?)

-- 
Matthew
This message is non-smoking


--
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/