[HEADSUP] Base category
Sat Dec 6 19:30:00 GMT 2014
On Dec 6 13:21, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 12/6/2014 12:57 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Dec 6 12:40, Ken Brown wrote:
> >>On 12/6/2014 11:57 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>>isn't it rather annoying that even Base packages have dependencies
> >>>outside the Base category? So, even if I perform a plain Base-only
> >>>installation, I get asked if dependencies shall be fullfilled, which, as
> >>>a question, is more than borderline anyway.
> >>>Therefore, shouldn't we put all packages Base packages depend on into
> >>>Base as well?
> >>That makes sense to me. The popup about dependencies could be confusing for
> >>someone installing Cygwin for the first time.
> >>>Also, can we automate this?
> >>I'm not sure that's a good idea. If the dependencies of a Base package
> >>change, it's probably good for this to be noticeable, in case it was due to
> >>a packaging error.
> >Uh, I was only talking about automating to add the categories to all
> >affected packages once and get a list of packages to send to this list.
> I just did a test install on each architecture and extracted the info from
> Both arches:
> 32-bit only:
> 64-bit only:
Cool, thanks. These are much less packages than I feared.
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Cygwin-apps