[PATCH] setup: Handle the package validation exception
Mon Jan 23 22:29:00 GMT 2006
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Igor Peshansky wrote:
> > And here's the patch (attached). The ChangeLog is below.
> The reason that I haven't fixed this earlier is that I wanted to somehow
> handle this a little more gracefully than just pretending that the
> package doesn't exist. That could cause a lot of user confusion. I
> think at the least it should give a dialog that it found a corrupt
> package and that it's going to ignore it, and possibly suggest or offer
> to delete it.
Well, let's look at it this way: if we are downloading, that's exactly the
behavior we want -- pretend the corrupted cached version doesn't exist and
re-download it. If we're installing from the local directory, then we
cannot install the corrupted packages anyway, so they might as well not
exist. Sounds to me like ignoring a corrupted version is the right course
of action in any case.
In fact, why should the user even care that their local version is
corrupted? All they should know is whether it's available to be installed
(when doing a local install). And for network installs, caching should be
transparent anyway. For power users, we can add some logging on corrupted
Is there a flaw somewhere in the above logic?
|\ _,,,---,,_ email@example.com | firstname.lastname@example.org
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' old name: Igor Pechtchanski
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"
More information about the Cygwin-apps