setup

[Warren Young]

On Aug 10, 2015, at 10:40 AM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> 
> Warren Young writes:
> 
>> In that sense, setup.exe is already bootstrapped: it has everything
>> within itself to be able to replace itself.
> 
> I do like the concept of a self-contained executable, but teaching
> setup.exe new tricks is likely a larger effort than adding a script here
> and there to an install system.

Isn’t the whole point of this discussion that setup.exe already knows all the tricks it needs to in order to do what we want here, except for the “replace setup.exe in place” issue I’ve brought up separately?

Why do you need a self-contained POSIX environment to replace setup.exe?