On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 04:29:58PM +0200, Jean-Michel POURE wrote: > I wouldn't like to use the Cygwin installer because it might conflict with > W32/Debian packages. Let me explain again what I would like to contribute : > > 1) Package management > > - Port Debian dpkg to native Windows and compile it using mingw. This task > has > nearly been accomplished on http://debian-cygwin.sourceforge.net/bootstrap/.
Last I heard there's still this little problem of replacing locked files -- dpkg depends on it, Windows can't do it. To date, the best solution I can see is to do install symlinks in /bin, /usr/bin, and so on, which point to the real executables (which go in some other location, with their version number appended). When you want to upgrade, install the file as foo-version.number, and point the symlink at it. You'd probably also want a little daemon or cronjob to remove the obselete versions once they became unlocked. [...] > - Compile Cygwin.dll using mingw. This will enable the creation of a first > W32/Debian Cygwin.dll package. This should be possible using MSYS-1.0.7 and > MinGW-1.1. > > This will allow to create W32/Debian packages and tell wether they depend on > Cygwin or not. For example, we may offer Perl with depency to Cygwin and > another one with no depency (mingw). What you're setting out here is interesting, but is a bit different from what was previously envisioned. The initial design was probably more Debian/Cygwin than Debian/w32, but people have mentioned LINE too. By making Cygwin optional I personally suspect you'd break an unmanageable number of things, without really gaining much, BICBW. J -- John Ineson ``Is LaTeX hard to use? It's easy to use if you're one of the 2% of the population who thinks logically and can read an instruction manual.'' -- LL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
