Installer names not meaningful enough
Wed Dec 14 21:58:00 GMT 2016
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 4:50 PM, cyg Simple <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> And if we were purely *nix your argument might hold merit but this setup
> executable provides a Windows OS based install of a Windows based
> application set known as Cygwin.
If we were purely *nix, we wouldn't be on Windows in the first place.
> The name of the executable has never been a problem; why are you trying
> to create one? There are just as many that would keep it simple and
> leave the name as is.
I don't recall anyone trying to create a problem so much as find out
the reasoning behind the decision and ask for the setup executable
version information to be more accessible than it currently is. At
present, it does not appear that the cygwin pages list the current
setup executable version at all, forcing either an aborted setup run
when the setup executable itself reports that the setup.ini file
indicates the currently running executable is outdated, or downloading
*something* to see if the version of setup available for download has
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
More information about the Cygwin