Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:39:01 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: setup.exe command line options
Message-ID: <20020123223901.GA23219@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <00b301c1a45e$82614b60$81293c3e AT Obsession>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <00b301c1a45e$82614b60$81293c3e@Obsession>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 10:36:44PM -0000, keith_starsmeare AT yahoo DOT co DOT uk wrote:
>I've made some progress, but it's still (infuriatingly) not at the stage
>where you can do a whole installation without dialog boxes (no offense -
>they're lovely dialog boxes!), but you can certainly have *fewer* dialog
>boxes!
>
>I'm wondering if I could submit what I have so far, and either leave some
>bits #ifdef'd out (how does the undefined macro
>COMMAND_LINE_OPTIONS_FULLY_IMPLEMENTED sound!?) or just miss those bits out
>completely from my diff.
>
>I was hoping to submit the final fully working diffs, but I'm only working
>in my spare time and everytime I have a look at the latest sources they've
>moved on so far.... I'm always playing catch up! I've done a lot of the
>grunt work; and I'd like some feedback on what I've done.

Does it even need to be commented out?  It seems like, if it works partially,
we just have a partial implementation.  No need to suffer the bit rot assocated
with ifdefs.

cgf