This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: setup.exe : nice in theory, not-so-clever in practice!
- To: joe at speedtrap dot freeserve dot co dot uk
- Subject: Re: setup.exe : nice in theory, not-so-clever in practice!
- From: DJ Delorie <dj at delorie dot com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 13:19:54 -0400
- CC: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- References: <001b01c0bf82$722ed760$0101a8c0@oemcomputer>
> * Separate TCP/IP connections have to be established for each component that
> is downloaded. The speed of a TCP/IP connection typically increases during
> its lifetime. By using lots of shortlived connections rather than a single
> long one, you throw away this benefit.
You can use the IE5 connect to an HTTP server to do it all in a single
connection. However, the speedup happens pretty quickly, and for
files the size that setup is downloading this loss is negligible.
> * If network problems occur during the installation, you have a
> semi-complete installation.
You should have a semi-complete *download* which you can restart in
the middle (that's harder to do with a single .exe file). The
installation doesn't start until after all the files are downloaded.
> * If at a subsequent time you wish to reinstall the same version of Cygwin,
> the means of doing this is far from clear.
You run setup in the directory it put the files in, and say "install
from local directory".
> People use "monolithic" installers for a reason. They're atomic (i.e. a
> single file), easy to move from one place to another on your file system,
> easy to manage, and easy to understand. I do believe the phrase "too clever
> by half" applies to your installer!!!
A monolithic install would be a hundred megabyte .exe. And moving one
100Mb file from system to system is no harder or easier than moving a
number of files totalling 100Mb in one directory to another system.
> By all means keep the new system, but *please* could you reinstate the
> option of a monolithic installer too???
The old monolithic installer had to be built with the InstallShield
SDK on a windows machine. We currently don't have such a license that
we can use outside of Red Hat, nor do we have a way of doing such a
thing on a Unix machine, nor would we be able to upgrade individual
packages as they're released. Would you rather install one 20k
tarball for a bash upgrade, or have to re-download all 100Mb just to
get one new executable?
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple