Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 00:31:27 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: New setup.ini is operational
Message-ID: <20011018003127.A8437@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20011016191041 DOT A30365 AT redhat DOT com> <3BCD5C50 DOT 11556 DOT 55FDC5CD AT localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3BCD5C50.11556.55FDC5CD@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 10:24:16AM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>setup.exe (2.78.2.13) offers me w32api-20010520 as new package now,
>though I have w32api-1.1-1 installed.

That should now be fixed.  Sorry that I couldn't respond earlier.  It's
been a day of many meetings.

>BTW, is it possible to post a 'reference' setup.hint file here, with 
>all optional contents?

I've updated the http://cygwin.com/setup.html page.

>>I've also upgraded setup.exe to use a much larger "chooser" screen so that
>>you can actually read the short package descriptions.  I haven't upgraded
>>to the latest category/dependency version of setup.exe since I thought that
>>people would want the chance to play with things first.  There will be a
>>lot of questions and confusion when we release the new version of setup.exe
>>so we need to make it as bulletproof as possible.
>
>I want to suggest a second time to use shorter category names, e.g.
>'System Environment/Daemons' or 'System Environment/Libraries', wouldn't it
>be enough to rename them in 'Daemons' and put openssl in 'Libs' && 'Devel'?
>Also I don't like the split into 'Base Libs', 'Libs', 'Base', why not put
>termcap in 'Base' && 'Libs', ditto 'Base Shells', we have 'Base' and 'Shells'

The "System Environment/Daemons" was a holdover from before the use of shorter
names.  I've changed squid and openssl to use the newer names.

>Ditto with 'Graphics Libs', 'Devel Libs' && 'Libs Text'

I don't see any reason to avoid putting the package in two categories if it
is appropriate.  It is "Graphics" and "Libs" not "Graphics Libs'.

cgf