Can upset handle more than one prev: tag?

Christopher Faylor cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com
Wed Aug 25 00:48:00 GMT 2004


On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 03:58:14PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>
>> Christopher schrieb:
>> 
>> > On Tue, Aug 24, 2004@03:36:33PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>> >>I want to keep two prvious perl version available, now I need to know:
>> >>is more than one tag for 'prev:' or 'test:' in setup.hint files
>> >>supported and handled correct by upset?  At least setup.exe seems to
>> >>have no problems with more than one [prev] tag in setup.ini.
>> 
>> > I'm surprised that setup.exe has no problems with more than one prev
>> > but upset only maintains one level, so any setup.hint -> setup.ini
>> > translation will eat extra prev's.
>> 
>> > Why do you think you need multiple previous versions?
>> 
>> I stillkeep perl-5.6.1@the mirrors for people who don't believe that
>> the new perl-5.8 is ok.  Now I have updated to 5.8.5 and removed 5.8.2
>> but got complaints because the postgres perl extension is linked against
>> 5.8.2 DLL.  I need to rethink the package naming if it is not possible
>> to get mroe than one prev tag into setup.ini (automatically, as
>> mentioned it works well with setup.exe).
>
>Is there any reason why we can't have a perl561 or perl_5_6_1 package?  
>It can definitely co-exist with perl-5.8.*, the library is already 
>versioned, and the executables can have the 561, 5.6.1, or _5_6_1 
>suffix...

Yes, if we *really* need to do this, that would be the way to go.

I think we should resist doing this very strongly however.  I don't believe
that any other distribution is using 5.6.1 so I don't see why Cygwin needs
to do so.

If there are problems with perl 5.8.x, shouldn't we be fixing the
problems?

cgf



More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list