[PATCH] inform user if any postinstall script failed to run

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Thu Aug 12 18:13:00 GMT 2010

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 06:53:47PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
>On 12 August 2010 15:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:26:33PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>On Aug 12 11:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>>> On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
>>>> >Shall we tone down the error box here a little bit? A postinstall
>>>> >failure in some obscure package that might only have been installed
>>>> >due to the user selecting 'All' won't actually impact on the use of
>>>> >Cygwin. I think the current wording will unnecessarily scare off
>>>> >unexperienced users who wouldn't know how to correct these failures.
>>>> >
>>>> I agree, I was going to suggest something like this. ??I'm afraid I
>>>> just copied and adjusted the text from the dependencies declined
>>>> dialog.
>>>> It might be better to point to setup.log.full since it seems that
>>>> contains the actual output from the failing command, and only from
>>>> the most recent run of setup.
>>>Yes, that sounds like a good idea to me.
>> I think that wording will still cause consternation.
>> Maybe we need something like:
>> "This does not necessarily mean that the affected package will fail to
>> function properly but if you do notice problems please check
>> /var/log/setup.log.full ."
>How about removing the popup box and amending the postinstall results
>page along those lines?

I think removing the MessageBox is a good idea but I still think we
should be slightly more reassuring about the errors.  This might just
be a temporary thing as package maintainers fix the problems in their
scripts; assuming that they actually do that.  So far the response has
not been overwhelming.

But assuming that the problems are all fixed then we can drop the
assurance in a couple of months.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list