This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: setup wishes -- any volunteers
- To: <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>,<cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com>
- Subject: RE: setup wishes -- any volunteers
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:27:08 +1100
- Thread-Index: AcCzENh9FA8akG0GRtW5LRrte/5HZAADia/A
- Thread-Topic: setup wishes -- any volunteers
I know this has been said before, but what about leveraging of an
existing packaging format - dpkg has all the capabilities you cite, and
they had a win32 project in place at one time. I'mm willing to polish my
elbows this weekend and see if I can make something work : but first I
would like a little buy-in that this is a good route to take.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 7:47 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: Re: setup wishes -- any volunteers
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 03:01:22PM -0500, Brian Keener wrote:
> >First off to Ron - Congratulations. Happy Honeymoon
> >Second to everyone else - anyone want to take the current
> setup.ini and
> >try to categorize each package according to what Chris is trying to
> >accomplish here. I don't know if I have enough
> experience/knowledge to
> >know which packages are dependent on which or for that matter what
> >category each might fall into. Obviously some I could
> figure out but it
> >might be nice if we could get a list started of all the
> current packages
> >and identify some common codes for dependencies and categories.
> >For example for categories we might have development,
> networking, shells,
> >mail ...., Text editing.
> >For dependencies I wonder do we want to try to group
> according to code or
> >do we want to use a list of packages that must then in turn
> be parsed to
> >determine the dependencies? Point to ponder....
> I was just thinking of using DJ's setup.hint file for most of
> this, although
> I guess you could also have a setup.dep for dependencies and
> a setup.desc
> for descriptions. Hmm. It does make sense to have specific files for
> these, now that I think of it.
> The dependencies will have to be nested so that gcc can
> depend on mingw
> which depends on w32api (to use a slightly inaccurate example). That
> means that the setup.exe code would have to be detect cycles.
> Or, maybe
> the update-setup script that we run on cygwin.com would be
> enough for this.
> I think it would be desirable to include a package in multiple
> categories so that bash could be part of both the "Base"
> dependency and
> the "Shells" dependency.
> I'll send the list of package, a proposed category, and dependencies
> in another message.