X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BP,TW_GT,TW_YG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Paul Subject: Re: Creating CD of installation packages: Download incomplete. Try again? Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 57 Message-ID: References: <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A20AD854C98A AT NIHMLBX02 DOT nih DOT gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 Robert Pendell elite-systems.org> writes: >On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Paul wrote: >> I managed to kluge a method to compare my installed packages with those >> downloaded and recorded in setup.log, thus identifying potentially missing >> packages and confirming that they will probably not be a problem. The >> listing of installed packages was gotten using cygcheck while the setup.log >> contained all the packages that successfully downloaded. I removed all the >> extraneous information in the 2 files that did not relate to packages, used >> vim...to make the formatting [the same] between the 2 files, then sorted the >> packages by name... and used vim's diff function to see what files were in the cygcheck info but not in the setup.log info (forgot to mention this). >> Here are the...packages [not downloaded]: >> >> Obsolete >> -------- >> _autorebase 000164-1 >> _update-info-dir 01088-1 >> libpng12 1.2.50-2 >> libpng14 1.4.12-3 >> libpng14-devel 1.4.12-3 >> vala-libcanberra-gtk 0.29-1 >> w32api 9999-1 >> >> Not obsolete >> ------------ >> libpoppler19 0.18.4-2 >> >> I determined whether a package was obsolete by using the cygwin's setup.exe, >> putting the versionless package name into the Search field, and toggling the >> switch for hiding obsolete packages. I'm not too worried about the 1 missing >> non-obsolete package, since setup.exe will prompt you to include packages >> that are needed to fulfill dependencies. Actually, since I'll be installing from CD, I better fetch the 1 missing non-obsolete file as well. Setup won't be able to fulfill dependencies for which the file is not on CD. >> ...I was surprised to see the obsolescence of autorebase. It was just >> recently made fully functional. Perhaps it has been folded into another >> package. I browsed the cygwin website & documentation to find release notes >> that might explain this, but no luck. I also tried googling for release >> notes, in vain. > > It isn't obsolete. All obsolete packages get assigned to _obsolete group. > _autorebase is assigned to _PostInstallLast and is still an active group. It > is likely hidden by default to minimize confusion. I searched http://cygwin.com/setup.html and http://cygwin.com/packages for mention of package "groups", _obsolete, and _PostInstallLast. Couldn't anything. Are such details available to noncontributors? Can I also assume that "_update-info-dir 01088-1" is not obsolete? Also, I was wondering if cygwin comes with release notes. I wasn't able to find any in the search described in my last post. -- 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