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: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:08:23 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-apps AT Cygwin DOT Com Subject: Re: Mingw and w32api package names. Message-ID: <20010912210823.A26480@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT Cygwin DOT Com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT Cygwin DOT Com References: <3B9FD44B DOT 3353 DOT AE9D806 AT localhost> <3B9FC725 DOT 265FB04F AT yahoo DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B9FC725.265FB04F@yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 04:35:49PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote: >"Gerrit P. Haase" wrote: >> >> I wonder why it is neccessary to 'rename' a package. >> There will be two packages in future? Runtime and Devel? >> > >For consistency. The package is distributed by MinGW.org as >mingw-runtime-$(VERSION). The new package will supersede the old one. Maybe the best thing to do is, as others (Chuck?) have suggested, keep the mingw directory but put a new, empty .tar.bz2 file in it. That will cause the old mingw stuff to be uninstalled. Then, make a new mingw-runtime directory and just put the tar balls there. Then, in a couple of months we can delete the mingw directory entirely. If you could verify that this does the "right thing", Earnie, I think this is the way to go. I don't see any other way to handle this. cgf