X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:59:27 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Python 2.6 - ctypes (specifically _ctypes) cannot be imported - Eclipse pydev integration broken as a result
Message-ID: <20100624075927.GT8163@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <op DOT veqvksdlhiwlwc AT afa-30100 DOT empolis DOT local> <1277282895 DOT 5496 DOT 47 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04> <20100623112002 DOT GA2828 AT tishler DOT net> <1277322718 DOT 5452 DOT 63 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04> <20100623195509 DOT GA20520 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <1277323442 DOT 5452 DOT 78 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1277323442.5452.78.camel@YAAKOV04>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Jun 23 15:04, Yaakov S wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 15:55 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > I've opted for using the union of previous and curr requirements but
> > that's not really too great either.  This is one of many places where
> > we could use a real package manager.
> 
> And you're not the only one.  The problem with that is it can pull in
> old libraries which (if nothing else depends on them) are simply not
> necessary, and e.g. on my system, ImageBase real estate is at a premium.
> 
> Here's a radical question: do we really need to allow for multiple
> versions of every package?  Other distros don't do this, why should we?

Fedora does, for instance, as soon as packages have been updated at
least once.  There's always a way to go back to the previous package,
which is rather helpful if a package shows strange behaviour after an
update.  Happened to me the week before with a package in F13.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

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