Please try new setup exe's

[Ken Brown]

On 7/15/2013 10:08 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 09:49:12PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 7/15/2013 8:20 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 01:05:53PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> I'd appreciate it if people could try the two new setup.exe's
>>>> installed at http://cygwin.com/
>>>>
>>>> http://cygwin.com/setup-x86.exe for 32-bit
>>>> http://cygwin.com/setup-x86_64.exe for 64-bit
>>>>
>>>> The setup.ini's for both are updated using a similar schedule to the
>>>> "official and soon to be deleted" version which uses
>>>> /var/ftp/pub/cygwin/release.  The -x86* versions of these programs
>>>> use the release directories from the arch specific locations.
>>>>
>>>> The setup.ini's used by these two new programs are not
>>>> backwards-compatible with old setup.exe.
>>>
>>> Just to be clear, these new setup.exe's should not do anything untoward
>>> to your existing installation.  They should *just work*.
>>
>> setup-x86_64.exe behaves differently from setup64.exe with respect to
>> source-only packages.  (I don't know which one is "right".)  This is
>> showing up for me because the 64-bit versions of gcc and readline are
>> source-only packages that are (incorrectly?) required by other packages.
>>   setup64.exe seems to ignore these requirements, whereas
>> setup-x86_64.exe wants to install the packages but then reports
>> "Incomplete download".
>
> Thanks for trying this.  I doubt that is anything that I introduced.
>
> Do you see the same behavior from setup-x86.exe?

I didn't have any problem with setup-x86.exe, but that probably just 
means that there are no packages in the x86 distro that require 
source-only packages.

Ken