[ITP] astrometry.net-0.38-1

Charles Wilson cygwin@cwilson.fastmail.fm
Wed Nov 9 23:24:00 GMT 2011

On 11/9/2011 5:00 AM, Jussi Kantola wrote:
> AstroTortilla is fine with a custom repo.  All we ever wanted was to
> be able to install astrometry.net with Cygwin's setup.exe


> How many
> would we need for it to be considered significant enough?

No idea.

> Is this document still valid?
> http://sourceware.org/cygwin-apps/package-server.html

Seems accurate -- but it's missing information about gpg security.  I 
think you want "Creating a custom Cygwin package server" -- you probably 
don't want to create or host a full mirror.

> Anything else I need to know?

Here's what I do, locally:


$ cd cygwin
$ ./genini --recursive release > setup.ini
$ bzip2 -c < setup.ini > setup.bz2

Then, upload setup.ini, setup.bz2, the new tarballs and setup.hint to 
your website, replicating the directory structure (from <top>/ on down).

Now, your users will have to invoke setup.exe with the -X, because 
otherwise setup.exe will expect the setup.ini/bz2 files to be signed. 
However, turning the security measures off is a problem, because then 
your users have no protection against corrupted files on the *main* 
mirrors, either.

So, ideally, you would ALSO sign *your* setup.ini/setup.bz2 files. See 

Now, this still requires your end users to take an explicit action (see 
item (3i),(3ii),(3iii) in the referenced announcement.)  You could 
enable them to do (3i) or (3iii) via a batch file that you 

See the cygwin-ports instructions for their users, here:

In that case, the use of 'cygstart' implies that cygwinports would be 
*added* to an existing cygwin installation; hence a bare-windows 
installation would require two separate setup.exe runs (*). This is 
actually a /good/ thing, because it means there's no confusion between 
"the standard cygwin installation on my box" and "the cygwinports cygwin 
installation on my box" -- your end users would just have one, to which 
they've added the "extra" stuff.

(*) future "update" runs of setup would handle both the 'standard' 
packages and the addons simultaneously.

> Thanks once again for your time and effort!  I'm sorry the lessons you
> gave me will go down the drain if I won't become a package manager ...
> ;-)

You're still managing a package...it just wouldn't be hosted as an 
intrinsic part of the cygwin distribution itself.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list