This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: [PATCH] Two fixes for setup postinstall handling.
Christopher Faylor wrote on 10 August 2008 16:30:
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 02:21:48PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> The first hunk finds if bash is in the list of packages that have
>> scripts to run and swaps it with the first entry if so.
> If this is necessary, I don't like the idea of special casing bash.
> Can't we add a keyword to setup.ini so this could be configurable?
Sure. Or we could make it automagic by looking out for sh.exe when it
goes by - using the same string we know we're going to be using to invoke
the scripts later?
>> The first hunk could be obviated by doing away with postinstall scripts
>> for bash, but it a) is perhaps an easier change than respinning a fresh
>> bash release,
> ? How is patching, reviewing the patch, rebuilding, and releasing
> setup.exe easier than Eric releasing a new version of bash which just
> installs sh.exe unconditionally?
Depends how busy Eric is.
>> b) is defensive programming - it's always going to be the case that, if
>> there are any scripts needed to install the shell, they should be the
>> very first thing we do, and this means that should a situation ever
>> arise in the future where we find ourselves needing bash postinstall
>> scripts, they will just work and we won't regress to the situation we
>> find ourselves in now.
> Sorry but I'm not yet convinced that this is necessary.
Well, it's still "just plain wrong" to rename a script to ".done" when you
know for absolute certain that it hasn't been.
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....