ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/11/02/20:54:00

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
Subject: Re: /setup.html please read - feedback desired
From: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <20011102204613.B31918@redhat.com>
References: <1004700277 DOT 7488 DOT 2 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
<3BE2E3D3 DOT 1050201 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011102134846 DOT H26975 AT redhat DOT com>
<1004745374 DOT 9086 DOT 77 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <20011102195741 DOT A31898 AT redhat DOT com>
<1004750730 DOT 519 DOT 26 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <20011102204613 DOT B31918 AT redhat DOT com>
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.15 (Preview Release)
Date: 03 Nov 2001 12:57:23 +1100
Message-Id: <1004752644.521.47.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Nov 2001 02:01:41.0325 (UTC) FILETIME=[7AF307D0:01C1640B]

On Sat, 2001-11-03 at 12:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 12:25:29PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >
> >i.e. I'd like to be able to say "cygupload -current package foobar.bz2"
> >and have that do the right thing.
> If cygupload puts the file on sources.redhat.com, then I'm in favor of
> that.  If it requires that you include '-current package', then I'm
> not sure that I am.

If package can always be inferred from the filename then package isn't 
needed. The -current could be the default behaviour.. see more below.

> >These are rough thoughts, but does the direction seem reasonable?
> I think that putting data in setup.hint that can easily be inferred from
> file names does not make sense.  You can't infer the ldesc, sdesc,
> category, or requirements from the filename.  You can infer the version
> number.

You cannot infer the stability. Prev/curr/test actually covers two
different axes - prev/curr is (or looks like) a version axis, and
curr/test looks like a stability metric.
I'm suggesting that the upload tool needs to know how 'stable' a package
is. And that the three trust levels - prev, curr, test be updated
orthogonally to each other, with a simple command to indicate that a
test package is now stable, and likewise for stable->prev. (although as
stable-prev are on a different axis, having that pair auto migrate would
make sense to me)

> What I'm trying to say is that I don't see any reason to require
> setup.hint for the, IMO, normal cases.

Sure... but :}
> I think that the parser should handle this and I actually think that
> much or all of the setup.hint style information should be part of the
> package rather than external to it.  I think we probably agree on
> that.

> However, if I produce a cygwin-1.3.59-1.tar.bz2 with no package info,
> I still think that 'upset' (the cygwin setup.ini updater) should
> be able to infer the info.

From cygwin-1.3.59-1.tar.bz2, I can infer
package - cygwin
version - 1.3.59
suffix  - 1
I cannot infer 

And the whole point of the new setup is to stop user questions due to
missing requirements. category, sdesc and ldsesc are niceties, and not

So I think that a setup.hint containing a requires: line is _mandatory_
(at a minimum it should list cygwin if the program is linked to cygwin).


- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019