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: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <3BE250D7.5050501@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 02:52:55 -0500 From: "Charles S. Wilson" 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-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: setup testers wanted References: <1004664322 DOT 5225 DOT 19 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <20011102031557 DOT 74466 DOT qmail AT web20009 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> <20011101224427 DOT B7348 AT redhat DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christopher Faylor wrote: > > It does raise the whole X11 issue, though. I'd like to include the > X11 stuff in setup.exe, too. Should we wait until we've ironed out > all of the bugs here first and then ask them what they want or should > we start making noises about this now in cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com? I think we should wait. Currently, the cygwin-xfree dist is developer-friendly (e.g. download lots of tarballs, run a script and answer lots of questions, and the script will install and configure stuff "properly"). Translating that into a setup-compatible tarball will take some work; IMO it'd be better to have a (mostly) stable setup.exe *before* asking the cygwin-xfree folks to embark on that task. --Chuck