Robert Collins
Sun Feb 24 02:38:00 GMT 2002

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Keener" <>

> > he solution is wrong, but I can't articulate (yet) how the model is
> > wrong, and so I've followed the (apparent) consensus.
> I don't know why that doesn't seem right to you.  It appears to me
that I will
> never have an installation that is comprised solely of all Test

[Devil's advocate mode on] Why not? Debian has one, and it works great.

> I
> will always be testing a few packages but the bulk of the system will
be the
> current Stable versions.  That would naturally be the nature of the
beast as
> working with all test versions would be to cumbersome to find where
> was failing.  That said if I have to work with Current Stable versions
while I
> am testing experimental packages why would I want the default on the
> packages to be Uninstall - I would want to keep those packages so I
would still > have a working system. I also do not particularly want to
click on 20 packages
> to say keep these instead of uninstalling.  Makes perfect sense to me.

I have never said that I want every package to uninstall. I have
explained that that behaviour is a SIDE EFFECT of the behaviour I want,
which is for system smarts about the intention of maintainers to be
removed from setup, and made explicit. This gives greater flexability,
and the potential for quicker changes - because setup.exe won't be part
of the change process.

However, that was not what I was referring to in saying that the
solution is wrong. I mean that the whole x= prev/curr/test y=version
model is wrong, and because THAT is wrong, the GUI and engine behaviour
is confusing (because it has multiple, reasonable interpretations).

> As to the NULL file when reinstalling - that patch was applied to HEAD
and not
> tried to just install zlib it still failed and would not install zlib.
It just > doesn't seem to like the last file.

I'll have a look-see.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list