X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references
	:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=nAOT
	XWZp6rievxMqZ4ZZkpNGwNu0DB18+KmhtfY+i1sKDKq0qTRC++/cO8q57rlfW61+
	8fiq/ojHqctjaGrMgLMOvzx95s0VKUSFlZpo5Ih3QdE6Xfs0Ypm5h49PfmeawESg
	Nb57tlOHDTnxnH2ylI8iRuNztX2KYgG1dzFftrI=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references
	:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=fHLair4L0q
	6bzmhNS414e7fb1hA=; b=Q/v9NHGI26Tc6Xcy2PxlPZx2tQYASsfk50aoeFRxMd
	AiCcHpmYurSqCaSrdCFFsCv9n7uu8+ocq55/4gLOJ3B3F4aPmVO1roWQ0v5oAe0G
	/SUtWjUH/qDJSkL+LgQtP5VgrTplCdQ7uP91+VUx8if26OGIMBMxIBMa+dKYGfC8
	A=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=moss, carrier, H*F:D*EDU, offer
X-HELO: elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:36:30 -0800
From: Stephen Paul Carrier <carrier AT Berkeley DOT EDU>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Installer names not meaningful enough
Message-ID: <20161205173630.GA1749@fedora.wp.comcast.net>
References: <CAG-pUxkQ_iniFA0r9i2zkT1uFMEvCei0wc9rd45RBYj2uBnVhA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <d7f8f9e5-e77d-8dde-8882-15084904cbe0 AT mitel DOT com> <ba495ad3-5e70-0edf-7958-24644e905963 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> <93ce058d-79e6-a213-1b6f-1ec3438b71c4 AT gmail DOT com> <5d61771c-00e8-9adb-58ff-8094bf12e550 AT gmail DOT com> <FC2C0B09-B862-4061-A2AC-598423D0CA05 AT yahoo DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <FC2C0B09-B862-4061-A2AC-598423D0CA05@yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-ELNK-Trace: ac59ebca7c9aed3bd4c20f6b8d69d888b92c5f0aecc81b51108e9432ddde69b8368994e8f29f8741350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-IsSubscribed: yes

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 11:37:41AM -0500, Ian Lambert wrote:
> On December 1, 2016 8:54:57 AM EST, cyg Simple <cygsimple AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 12/1/2016 8:25 AM, Vlado wrote:
> >> On 1.12.2016 13:51, Eliot Moss wrote:
> >>> I think that including the version of the setup program could be
> >helpful
> >>> - I tend
> >>> to add it (renaming the file by hand).  However, clearly we've lived
> >>> with things this
> >>> way for a long time ...
> >
> >More than a score years.
> >
> >> 
> >> I disagree.
> >> I have a script to update Cygwin. This script checks for new version
> >of
> >> setup, downloads, verifies signature, etc. Things would become much
> >more
> >> complicated with variable setup file name.
> >> Finally: Why should I care about the exact version number of setup?
> >> Script makes backups of the old setup files like setup.exe.0001,
> >0002,
> >> ..., just for a cause, but never in the past I did have to looking
> >for
> >> the setup with exact version number.
> >> 
> >
> >The only reason would be if you had an older version of the .ini file.
> >When the data prerequisites of the .ini file change there is a new
> >version of setup to handle that.

Right, and the way to learn if this is the case is to run setup.  I learn
that a new version is available by running the old version.

Running setup is also the way to find out what is the version.

I don't mind renaming the file myself, but would really appreciate any
way to know from the cygwin.com front page exactly which version of the
setup-*.exe is on offer.  (The current version of Cygwin DLL is useful,
but not the same thing.)

Stephen Carrier

--
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