Updated: 1.7.0-34 (...and a plea)

Corinna Vinschen corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Tue Dec 9 14:59:00 GMT 2008

On Dec  9 06:46, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Uh, I just remembered something I forgot so far.  We don't even need two
> > setup.exe versions.  Setup-1.7 decides which setup ini file to use
> > dependent on the Windows version.  NTs get setup-2.ini, 9Xes get
> > setup.ini.  It even changes its layout a bit.  For instance, for 9Xes
> > you still get the choice of text/bin mounts, for NTs you don't.  So we
> > really only need a single setup.exe in future, AFAICS :)
> Right, and since the 'release/' part is all in the .ini file anyway
> setup.exe doesn't actually need to be changed at all to do the
> switchover, it can be controlled entirely on sourceware just by telling
> upset which release dir goes with which ini file.
> Here's my question: Do we really need to inflict this 8.7GB of churn[1]
> on every mirror just for what seems to me to be a cosmetic reason for
> wanting the directory name to be "release/"?  Can't we just say that
> release-2/ is now what the dir is called and move on?  In other words,
> the switchover procedure would be "mv setup-1.7.exe setup.exe".

Maybe the discussion looked a bit strange but that was actually
what Chris and I already had agreed upon :)  The other point was that
release-2 needs to become an entire separated directory instead of
a unionfs, that's what Chris meant by saying to make release-2 a
first-class dir.  So it's not *only* a "mv setup-1.7.exe setup.exe".


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list