Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 12:30:14 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: setup revisit Message-ID: <20010324123014.B21739@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com References: <200103232349 DOT SAA03971 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <021801c0b3fb$97ff2d60$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010323204621 DOT B17066 AT redhat DOT com> <02ec01c0b406$6e3822b0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010323210835 DOT F17066 AT redhat DOT com> <031101c0b411$3f9cd3a0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010323222520 DOT A18513 AT redhat DOT com> <000d01c0b41c$ca137290$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010323234950 DOT A20785 AT redhat DOT com> <001701c0b42a$52e32d60$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <001701c0b42a$52e32d60$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>; from robert.collins@itdomain.com.au on Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:19:02PM +1100 On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 05:19:02PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: >Less messy than having the distribution channel completely external to >the software package... (example: Change mount styles -> rebuild >setup.exe). And I'm not suggesting a special case _beyond the >bootstrap_. I'm suggesting that the bootstrap _be the special case_. If we change the mount style then many existing cygwin applications break. >Installshield uses a bootstrap system. MS's Active Setup uses an >external system. RedHat's rpm falls into A) (How do you install the >kernel the 1st time? Not via rpm :] ). Windows update falls into A). MS >Visual studio falls into B). Most end-user software falls into B). Some >software (a growing number) fall into A) because they're including >"updaters". I like the consistency of setup.exe. There is one method that updates everything. You can do this because we rely on an underlying Windows OS being there. Red Hat setup doesn't have that luxury. We have discussed the issue of mount tables, etc., but given the pledge of backwards compatibility that we have, I don't think this is an issue. Maybe this really just argues for splitting the functionality that setup.exe needs into a separately loadable module that is used by both cygwin1.dll and setup.exe. >Now I'll admin that in unix based environments you can upgrade the >kernel and the packaing system in-place, without trickery... but at the >moment we don't have that luxury. It's something I can and will attack. >If I succeed with that, we should be able to update cygwin1.dll from >within cygwin1.dll. Note: Like you, I'm not worried about the special >cases: users of snapshots & developers. Cygwin B20 is an issue though.. >hmm. snapshots != developers. We ask end users to try snapshots. We can't penalize them for doing this. cgf