This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Fixing packages which rely on obsolete packages

On Jun 24 08:40, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:04:24AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Jun 24 10:14, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> On Jun 22 17:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 04:49:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> > >I'm refreshing the procedure for updating setup.ini on sourceware as
> >> > >part of moving 64-bit Cygwin out of beta and I came across this:
> >> > >[...]
> >> > Here's a similar list for 64-bit packages.  Apparently genini's error
> >> > checking leaves something to be desired.  Obviously some of these are
> >> > not obsolete.
> >> 
> >> Does that mean upset is already running all the time for 64 bit, or was
> >> that only a test.  I'm asking because I'd like to know if we still have
> >> to use GEN-sware after upload or not for the time being.
> >
> >Scratch that question.  Newly popping up md5.sum files are a rather
> >good indication.
> I don't know what you're inferring from md5.sum's but if I regenerated a
> new setup64.ini, it was entirely by accident.

Well, I wrongly inferred from the existence of a new md5.sum file that
upset is running.  I should have looked at the date of setup64.ini
itself instead.  I just ran GEN-sware to update setup64.ini.


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]