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: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:01:46 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: setup.exe & .tbz / .tgz
Message-ID: <20011015120146.B5679@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3BCB156D DOT 23119 DOT 9B1AE6 AT localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3BCB156D.23119.9B1AE6@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 04:57:17PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>is setup.exe able to recognize packages with .tbz as bzip2 compressed
>and .tgz as gzip compresed?

Use the source and answer your own question!  A quick grep for "tbz" would
show you that it doesn't exist.  That would be a good hint.

Since setup.exe is intended to be a cygwin package installation tool
whose purpose is for the installation of cygwin packages from sites
which mirror sources.redhat.com (did I get enough qualifying words in
there this time or is someone going to try to pick semantic holes in
this statement?) we don't have any need to handle ".tgz" or ".tbz"
extensions.  We don't use them.

We've already had the discussion about how wonderful it would be if
setup.exe was a general purpose tool.  It is not a general purpose tool.
You might be trying to use it for other than its express purpose.  That's
fine.

Please let's not start the "But I use it to clean toilets and it works
great!" discussion again unless you are prepared to provide actual code.
We've already started a slow moving discussion towards generalizing the
archive interface.  We don't need to restart this from the beginning
unless it is actually dead.

cgf