2nd summary (was Re: [HEADSUP] ALL Maintainers, please reply.)

Christopher Faylor cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com
Tue Sep 27 13:52:00 GMT 2005

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 09:04:03AM +0100, John Morrison wrote:
>On Tue, September 27, 2005 6:18 am, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 11:19:36PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>There is no clear maintainer.  I was asking if you'd be interested in
>>>>making this available via ncurses.
>>>>If you release a new version of ncurses which contributes a 'clear',
>>>>I'll delete the clear package.
>>>I've got a new release of ncurses which contains /usr/bin/clear.exe
>>>ready to go (but not yet copied into /release).
>>>Go ahead an put an empty clear package up on sources (clear-1.0-2 ?) and
>>>we'll let that propagate, and then I'll move my new ncurses over to
>> I know that there was some talk of releasing an empty clear package but
>> I don't see how that would be useful.  If I do that then we stand the
>> chance
>> of eliminating clear.exe when the clear package is "updated", meaning that
>> we could conceivably remove the clear.exe that ncurses installed.
>> I think the only thing we can do is remove clear from the distribution.
>How about making the new (obsolete) clear package depend on ncurses? 
>Would that force people to upgrade?

Yes, that would do it, however it has to be coordinated so that
releasing the empty package coincides with the release of the new
version of ncurses.  AFAICT, the version of ncurses on sourceware.org
has not been updated yet.  The switchover should be as close to
simultaneous as we can make it.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list