On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 10:40:52AM -0500, David A. Cobb wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 05:07:46PM -0500, David A. Cobb wrote: >> >>>Charles Wilson wrote: >>>>it occurs. (Perhaps upgrades of currently installed packages should >>>>ALWAYS precede installation of new packages?) >>>> >>> >>>I've had cases like this in another context and found the most >>>straightforward solution is for (setup.exe) to do any uninstalls first, >>>then any reinstalls, then everything else. This would also have saved a >>>few shot toes when libncurses#n came out (I thin`). >>> >> >>I've thought about suggesting the same thing but the problem with that >>scenario is that if you cancel an installation, then all sorts of stuff >>is uninstalled -- which probably isn't what you expected. > >Probably not. But "cancel" at what point in the process? It's *real* >hard to program an installation procedure that's robust in the face of a >user clicking the "cancel" button in the middle. Even the >"professional" packages are likely to barf.
The "professional" installers aren't installing a number of disparate packages. I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that if I cancel a gcc installation my current binutils setup will still be intact. cgf
