This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [PATCH 2/5] Allow setup to parse more than 3 versions from the setup.ini file
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:36:11 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Allow setup to parse more than 3 versions from the setup.ini file
- References: <1303650357-3668-1-git-send-email-jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk> <1303650357-3668-3-git-send-email-jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk> <20110424161004.GA23944@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4DBAC9E3.9090201@dronecode.org.uk> <20110429152959.GC19701@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <BANLkTinLwGZ3oJm6Z6zDyxhhZLVvXJRy3w@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:12:19PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>2011/4/29 Christopher Faylor:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 03:23:31PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>>On 24/04/2011 17:10, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 02:05:54PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>>>> This recognizes any "[version]" line as introducing the information for
>>>>> another version, which doesn't have one of the trust levels [curr], [prev]
>>>>> or [test], and so isn't automatically selected when setup is
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the value of <version> carries no meaning, it might make more sense
>>>>> to mandate the use of a specific string like "[also]" or "[other]", or
>>>>> perhaps "[prev-1]", "[prev-2]", etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have written a corresponding patch to genini
>>>>>
>>>>> Setup already does all the neccessary sorting in version order etc. to
>>>>> use these additional versions.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011-04-24 ?Jon TURNEY ?<jon.turney-GrJqePx9RPPAJUdA+FbntA@public.gmane.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> ? ? * PackageTrust.h (trusts): Add TRUST_OTHER.
>>>>> ? ? * inilex.ll: tokenize any other [version] as the T_OTHER token.
>>>>> ? ? * iniparse.yy: Add T_OTHER token and set package trust
>>>>> ? ? to TRUST_OTHER when it is used.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry but what is this good for? ?Who would use it?
>>>
>>>If you are asking why a package maintainer might want this, then for e.g. [1]
>>>
>>>[1] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2011-03/msg00049.html
>>
>> Ok, there's one package maintainer who wants it.
>>
>> Since this is, IMO, a rather large departure from past convention, it would
>> be nice to see if this is something that other people want.
>>
>> This change will mean I'll need change to the program which generates
>> setup.ini so I'd like to make sure that this is going to be used.
>
>I am in strong favor of this new feature.
Since I didn't see anyone complain that this is a problem, I'd say go ahead
and check it in Jon.
cgf