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
Message-ID: <041401c1bd7c$c7de8d10$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA760014ADE AT itdomain003 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <3C774EAA DOT 9000204 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <010f01c1bd1f$7b925cf0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20020224162120 DOT GB17909 AT redhat DOT com> <3C79380C DOT 8090002 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Subject: Re: pkgconfig
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 08:46:55 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2002 21:45:59.0078 (UTC) FILETIME=[A5596C60:01C1BD7C]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>

> Okay, that's good.  IIRC, the problems that cropped up before involved
> the fact that /etc/installed.db listed installed packages WITH their
> package path, and package comparison *included* the path:
...
> And then, when setup tried to compare THAT with the new setup.ini
which
> specified (for instance)
...
> setup failed to recognize that those two packages were really just
> different versions of the same pacakge -- it didn't uninstall the old
> one, but DID install the new one, and now installed.db listed TWO
packages:
...
> or some such.  And then, MUCH wackiness ensued -- because some parts
of
> the code did pathless comparisons, and other parts did not.  Since
> Robert asserts that package comparisons are now done SOLELY on package
> name and NOT path, this 'wackiness' won't happen.  Good enough for me.

Check your installed.db now :}. We need the setup200202 in release to
ensure this though.

> So, the only objections to rearranging the package structure is:
>
> 1) bandwidth to the mirrors
> 2) conflicts between 'fast' mirrors and 'slow' mirrors
> 3) the multi-repository code when two repositories have the same
package
> on different local paths.
> 4) repository storage: I've noticed that many mirrors only add new
> tarballs -- they never remove the old tarballs even when sourceware
HAS
> removed them.  So, these repositories will have redundant copies of
the
> relocated packages -- one in the old location and one in the new.  If
> setup.ini doesn't refer to the outofdate locations, then this
shouldn't
> cause US problems; the folks who pay for the disk drives on the
mirrors
> may worry tho...
>
> If these are not serious worries, then:

I don't think they are (I have answers for all of 'em) :}. The only
caveat is that the *same* version _should_ not appear in two locations
at once (setup will handle this, but not as 'smartly' as it could).

> 1) I'll wait until the new setup is out for a few days
> 2) I'll move the gettext package from contrib/ to latest/
>
> If this is successful, then we will have *proven* -- as opposed to the
> armchair analysis that we've been doing in this thread -- that there
is
> no problem with relocating packages in the repository.  THEN, and
*only*
> then, Chris could begin to rearrange things on sourceware -- if he
wants
> to do so.

Rob