This is the mail archive of the cygwin 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: Problem uninstalling/deleting cygwin

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Larry Hall wrote:

> At 01:34 PM 1/25/2005, Dave Korn wrote:
> >> This subject is really off-topic for this list.  The "cygwin
> >> time machine" is not a service supported by this list.
> >
> >  Larry, you're being too harsh there!  The "how to uninstall" procedure is
> >standard advice and fully backwardly compatible.  If we would give the uninstall
> >advice to someone who never upgraded beyone 1.3.x, there's no reason not to give
> >it to someone who has downgraded; we wouldn't tell the first person "Oh,
> >uninstalling 1.3.x is not supported, so first update your entire installation to
> >1.5.12, then follow this procedure.....", now would we?
> No, that's true.  The uninstall procedure is documented in the FAQ.
> Anyone that wants it can find it there.  But I didn't read Neven's
> request as a simple inquiry of how to uninstall Cygwin (which the
> FAQ does cover) but rather how do I fix this now that I installed
> an old version from the "cygwin time mmachine" and trying to uninstall
> it didn't work.  I don't know why Neven had a problem but if the

The removal instructions in the FAQ should apply, reguardless of which
version of Cygwin he has.  The instructions do cover most situations, but
not in detail (eg: "How do I uninstall inetd?"), and, arguably, that's
not something the FAQ needs to specifically address.

> prescribed approach given by the FAQ didn't work for him, then it
> seems reasonable to consult Peter's site with further questions.
> While I would agree that we cannot say that we don't support uninstalling
> of old versions, Neven says that he installed some old version over his
> current, which really isn't a supported option for Cygwin setup.  There's
> the ability to downgrade an existing installation to the version just
> previous or there's the ability to install the previous version for the
> first time.  But installing a previous version over a current installation
> isn't a recommended way of using setup even if you're not using the
> "cygwin time machine".  And if you are, well then there's a whole set

In reality there's not a whole lot of difference between "install the
previous version" and installing an older snapshot image.  Setup runs the
preremove scripts, removes all files from the package, then puts down the
new/old files and runs the postinstll scripts.  It's really more of an
individual package compatability and dependency issue.  But then, package
compatability and dependency issues exist reguardless of weither your
talking about Cygwin or Linux or AIX or HP-UX, etc.  I've had situations
where I was upgrading an old clean image to the latest stuff (from one of
the official mirrors) and had "Bad Things"(tm) happen trying to revert a
single package to it's official previous version afterwards.  It's par
for the course that packages are imperfect and cleaning up after yourself
is never as simple and creating the mess in the first place.  I, myself,
recently added code to the zsh package to install a profile if not
already present, and compare and remove that profile on deinstall.
That's a new feature, where previously the package would just plop the
file down and not care about it on deinstall.  So, if you installed the
previous version, de-installed it and installed the latest version, you'd
still be stuck with the old version of that profile, and it would never
get upgraded unless manual intervention is taken.

> of variations and options available that were not there heretofore.
> This is the reason I directed Neven back to Peter's site.  Clearly,
> though, if Neven and others that use the "cygwin time machine" can get
> what they need from the web pages to help them with any problems
> they have after using the "cygwin time machine", then that's great.  But
> my position is that folks that have a problem after using Peter's site need
> to consult Peter, at least at first, the same as any other 3rd party site.

I completely agree with Larry here.  I've provided the "rope" for people
to "hang themselves", the least I can do is help them out when they are
just "dangling" there (umm...sorry for the metaphor :).  I will be adding
doc to the webpage talking about the perils of downgrading, but in truth
this subject should be noted in the normal FAQ concerning reverting to
the previous version as well.

> Obviously, those who disagree with me are still free to answer the
> inevitable posts that we'll get here about the "cygwin time machine"
> anyway.  With any luck, those posts will be few and far between so there
> will be little need to discuss how much noise of this kind is too much.

Oh, come now, Larry.  We had a hugh thread going concering the *content*
of the fortune data files, which was totally off-topic for Cygwin, yet we
all kept on beating that horse.  Off-topic doesn't stop it from being
discussed anyways. :)

> --
> Larry Hall                    

Peter A. Castro <> or <>
	"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

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