Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <3BD90938.5060205@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 02:56:56 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010726 Netscape6/6.1
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: setup.exe stalled?
References: <20011024110825 DOT A17208 AT redhat DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Okay, I noticed two weird things:

1) somethings flaky with the parser.  libncurses5 (for instance) shows up 
in a category called "Base Libs" --- and does not show up in the "Base" or 
"Libs" category.

2) There's no radio button for "Prev".  We got three labels (Prev, Curr, 
Exp) but only two radio buttons.

Other than that it seem to work okay.

--Chuck


Christopher Faylor wrote:

> I think that I have a functional version of setup.ini on
> sources.redhat.com.  The next step is for people to do verification on
> setup.exe to see that it works as expected.
> 
> Is anyone interested in doing this?  As I mentioned previously, I know of
> one problem with setup.exe that is my problem but it is also in the branch
> version so I don't think it is a big deal.  It should not impact any
> testing.
> 
> I'd like to eventually be in the position where we stop promising that this
> version of setup will do great things and actually unleash it on the world.
> 
> Does anyone think that it is ready for that?
> 
> Should I just release it as is?  That would imply that someone is
> willing to field all of the questions that will eventually pop up about
> this new version.
> 
> cgf
> 
>