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:to:subject:references
	:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=cdHgkwDY/GvrA5P0kwwonLuJdtGtx
	ityPqACGCga5lrQt9s+gnvqT/F+Ceym59DKMFGP/PwSuHs9uAlWht7jkzxwykl36
	ufmUJeE4XrXeQxDIMl8Xq8fZW09EEQJXV4cfYSgd6zGYi0IXKSo6hFAyt+y22oeX
	cYpR66m7LKzeHA=
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: <5a35304c.9ba6ca0a.5e71f.8a99@mx.google.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 06:40:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Steven Penny <svnpenn AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: setup's response to a "corrupt local copy"
References: <64D09542-A92E-423B-A6C0-479A025B0759 AT solidrocksystems DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8; format=flowed
User-Agent: Tryst/2.0.1 (github.com/svnpenn/tryst)

On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 14:50:56, Vince Rice wrote:
> No, you never need any opinion that is in conflict with yours. I'm not going
> to argue with you for a variety of reasons, not least because the decision is
> not yours. You have shown you don't care what anyone else thinks on this or
> any other issue, and believe me, the feeling is reciprocated. I offered my
> thoughts for the people whose decision this really is, and I leave it with
> them.

sure i do - here is example where i screwed up - and fixed a problem on my end:

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-01/msg00236.html

i do care about "the other side", when said side presents a referenced and
reasoned response. you have failed to do that. you presented a use case where
you were creating custom archives, then putting them in local package directory,
then not updating setup.ini. wait no, that was Ken:

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-12/msg00092.html

you presented no evidence or references really:

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-12/msg00145.html

mostly and opinion post. its possible that this issue doesnt even apply to you.
with ken, he is building custom archives so it applies to him. with me, i have
a package manager that runs in concert with setup.exe, so it applies to me:

http://github.com/svnpenn/sage

do you actually have an personal experience in this matter, or did you just want
to slight me and offer an opinion of someone with no experience of the issue at
hand. i fear the latter. APT, DNF and ZYpp are very popular package managers,
with APT being used by hundreds of thousands of people:

http://stackexchange.com/leagues/76

so it makes sense that setup.exe should behave in a manner similar to APT,
unless a very good reason is discovered why it shouldnt. more likely the
setup.exe behavior with corrupt files was decided long ago, and without
consideration to other package managers. and now that I am considering them, we
maybe have some people dissenting just to dissent, with no personal experience
of the issue. we are not talking removing files from:

C:\Users\Vince\Documents

we are talking about removing files from:

C:\http%3a%2f%2fcygwin.mirror.constant.com%2f

or similar, a directory specifically created by setup.exe. It is not
unreasonable to expect that similar to how setup.exe has the power to remove
anything from:

C:\cygwin64

that it would and should have the power to remove from a directory that it
created.


--
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