[HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area
Fri Apr 4 00:39:00 GMT 2008
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 06:01:37PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Apr 3 09:56, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> For 1.7, I think we ought to decouple /bin <> /usr/bin and /lib <>
>>> /usr/lib. The rationale for keeping those linked no longer applies in
>>> the modern setup.exe world.
>> Full ACK! However, this needs a bit of careful revisiting of some of
>> the packages. For instance, assuming the Cygwin DLL will go to /bin,
>> cygrunsrv should also reside in /bin when we do this, not in /usr/bin,
>> obviously. Right now I must admit that I prectically don't care if my
>> packages install the binaries in /bin or /usr/bin.
> Yep. A few things off the top of my head:
> 1) the shells need to install both in /bin and /usr/bin. This is up to the
> individual maintainers when they build their -1.7 versions, but to take on
> super-duper important shell:
> Or "tough. you want to run /bin/bash, ensure /usr/bin is in your PATH"
Yes. Making duplicate copies is asking for trouble.
> 2) build tools (netrel, gbs, cygport) might need a few additions/tweaks to
> support any of the above.
>> I don't know. I assume I just took this as it is. I guess the
>> only reason to create user mounts to begin with was, so that any
>> non-privileged user can create mount points, too, for a pure
>> "just me" installation in a restricted environment.
>> However, that's not really necessary anymore with /etc/fstab.
>> So I agree, we can simply get rid of fstab.$SID.
> No, please don't...I like my /desktop mount...
You don't need fstab to do mounts. It's always possible to add a mount
to your .bashrc or something. That's what you'd do on linux if you
wanted similar functionality.
More information about the Cygwin-apps