cygwin beta packages
Mon Nov 10 20:54:00 GMT 2014
On 11/10/2014 1:31 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Two minor nits:
> The current beta packages contain a "." in the release number. That dot is
> chopped off along with the anything that follows in some places during
> install in setup.exe. A better naming scheme would use a letter there,
> so perhaps "0b8" (I know that this doesn't produce problems since I've
> been packaging snapshots for local installation that way for a long
This probably explains the strange results reported in
in which the base-cygwin package comes very late in the dependency
order, and so its postinstall script gets run late.
Apparently setup.exe doesn't parse the data for the cygwin package
correctly, and its dependencies therefore don't get taken into account
in computing the dependency order.
You can see this by putting '#define DEBUG 1' in package_db.cc before
building setup.exe. The setup log then shows the order in which
packages are visited while building the dependency order. base-cygwin
ought to be visited immediately after cygwin, but it is only visited
much later (if the test version of cygwin is being installed).
I had just discovered this and was trying to figure out why, when your
More information about the Cygwin-apps