X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <462C0F92.D0282878@dessent.net> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:44:50 -0700 From: Brian Dessent X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: libusb-win32 auto-install? References: <20070422142332 DOT GN7781 AT interface DOT famille DOT thibault DOT fr> <462B7BBF DOT 6030300 AT cygwin DOT com> <20070422152037 DOT GQ7781 AT interface DOT famille DOT thibault DOT fr> <462C0B1E DOT 1000002 AT cygwin DOT com> <20070423013301 DOT GE7781 AT interface DOT famille DOT thibault DOT fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Samuel Thibault wrote: > Yes of course (I actually call the uninstallation script at preremove). > But the question is "do we dare installing a driver just because the > user asked for package installation?". > > The problem is that libusb-win32 might be pulled as a dependency of > another package (the upcoming brltty package for instance), in which > case the use may be really be aware that some driver will get installed. I think it would be very bad to install a (kernel-mode) driver by default without any action of the user just because they selected a package to install. > Maybe I could ship two separate packages: one for the library and one > for the driver, and automatically install the driver at postinstall of > the second package. That sounds ugly, why can't the user just run foo-config like every other package that requires configuration? Brian -- 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/