Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:26:26 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: info: single install xfree86 + minimal cygwin? Message-ID: <20020410012626.GI23551@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com References: <3CB393D6 DOT 4030405 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CB393D6.4030405@ece.gatech.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:22:30PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >Now, this works, and upset/setup are happy (every binary package has a >"src" package) but it is hackish, ugly, and a pain to maintain. Is >there a better solution? (Or can we discard the psuedo-src packages >without repurcussion? Won't upset be upset by the "bin without src" >problem?) If it is upset I'll be upset. It should be acceptable to have bin without source. If it causes a problem, I'll fix it. cgf