DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=NJrETU1s4EXFfVlV
	mRH8Dhn5j9GPtO1DNaXT1cuNTeA4ApsBbJEOnr6CbMj749TxMCbuKmAv4h504qjn
	UhbMSvV7f5lyKRmaTsBjDc3I3Uo1B9sct3OdBRh6+rOiqEZeJEXUnU8aFpYhefcp
	a10MTlL6Dvy3CL6ZT0SCdD7LXKU=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-id: <5277F460.3070205@cygwin.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:24:16 -0500
From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Seeking a suggestion for unattended mass install procedure
References: <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C40C86D AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <5277D4A0 DOT 1050809 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C40C913 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <5277DB67 DOT 5050903 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C40C962 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <5277E992 DOT 8070602 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C40CA43 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov>
In-reply-to: <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C40CA43@MLBXv04.nih.gov>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 11/4/2013 2:04 PM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>> Are you saying this won't work?
>> Or do you just not like it?
>
> A little bit of both, actually.  Windows CMD.EXE has an 8K limit on the command line
> length, AFAICT.  Even if that was not exceeded first time the package list
> was created, it may easily get there on a complete re-run of the install procedure
> (beginning with the manual package selection).  The worst part is that it may
> fail silently without setup even noticing until after the system is placed
> into production (and failing because of the missing packages).

OK, you certainly don't have to accept any alternative suggested.  But it
does sound to me like you're adding additional requirements that you didn't
previously state.  In other words, if using "setup*.exe" once manually to
populate a download directory (or simply creating a package mirror) is
enough to get you everything you need, you can certainly verify that it's
possible to install from that directory using the script you've created.
That should be all you need for at least one iteration of your unattended
installs.  If you plan to alter this process or the download directory on
a regular basis, then certainly there is some overhead in verifying the
script still works as you intend.  No argument here.

-- 
Larry

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
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