Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Message-ID: <000701c249dc$2cea98c0$6fc82486@medschool.dundee.ac.uk> Reply-To: From: To: Cc: Subject: Setup and dependencies Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 14:02:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In between the two extremes of "basic" and "complete" installations of Cygwin, setup allows the user to make their own selection from what is on offer. As a simple example of what can happen, it is possible to select man, and de-select groff. After installation is completed, any attempt to use man will fail, because (as is made explicit in setup.ini) man requires groff. I can see that with 228 packages to choose from (today) the dependence graph becomes moderately complex: but are setup.exe and setup.ini presently intended to supervise this aspect of a user's installation and prevent such "illegal" selections? (In which case I think this is a failure.) (I can also see that setup.ini offers all necessary relevant information to the user, who might reasonably be expected to put some intelligent effort into achieving a sufficient choice for glitch-free behaviours. But it's precisely because this becomes so difficult so quickly, that automated invisible supervision from setup would be so much appreciated.) Thank you. Fergus -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/