Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, November 9, 2005 9:31 am, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] ? J.
Please upload: run-1.1.6-1
wget http://www.freedesktop.org/~ago/cygwin/run/run-1.1.6-1.tar.bz2; wget http://www.freedesktop.org/~ago/cygwin/run/run-1.1.6-1-src.tar.bz2; Changes: Order of icons fixed to match index used in x-start-menu-icons added man page signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Please upload: run-1.1.6-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Alexander Gottwald on 11/9/2005 6:07 AM: wget http://www.freedesktop.org/~ago/cygwin/run/run-1.1.6-1.tar.bz2; wget http://www.freedesktop.org/~ago/cygwin/run/run-1.1.6-1-src.tar.bz2; Uploaded. I left 1.1.5-2 as previous. - -- Life is short - so eat dessert first! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDcfk684KuGfSFAYARAv4pAJ9xQGhcFpUYqBMq88GVQERy3ucBTACgznxm a7tXhKfC4uoebcCx9fiu7SI= =ZVxD -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, but otherwise I like the ALL-CAPS idea (in fact, the packages also ought to be ALL-CAPS, maybe with dashes in the category and the underscores in packages, or vice versa). Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 9 09:35, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, What about a leading dot? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I also think it's time for this, and propose that whatever naming scheme is agreed upon, setup.exe should have a chooser view that only shows these (that view should probably be the default one, too).
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 9 07:56, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I also think it's time for this, and propose that whatever naming scheme is agreed upon, setup.exe should have a chooser view that only shows these (that view should probably be the default one, too). I would be careful with this. The package selection groups are only really useful on the first install. Later calls to setup for updating or installing more packages are usually better off with the current view. Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category view. Can storing the last view be added easily? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 9 09:35, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, What about a leading dot? Yep, looking at the lexer, a leading dot should work (without quoting). And I like it better than an '@' or a space... Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
on Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:11 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Hmm, outlook quotefix is better than nothing, but optimal) SNIP Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES Hmm... default has little to do with packages imho, or? USER-PROFILES USER indicates something personal... :-p John Morison wrote: (manual fix) +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] More wording ideas: SELECTION, CHOICE, PRESET, ORIENTATION predefined package choice ? Cygwin_use-orientation-presets? Cygwin-use-presets ? ... with better wording. AFTERTHOUGHT: The commandline automatic install possibilities need to be considered before adding GUI-stuff. -- /H
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote: on Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:11 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES Hmm... default has little to do with packages imho, or? USER-PROFILES USER indicates something personal... :-p John Morison wrote: (manual fix) +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] More wording ideas: SELECTION, CHOICE, PRESET, ORIENTATION predefined package choice ? Cygwin_use-orientation-presets? Cygwin-use-presets ? ... with better wording. How about just .INSTALLATION-PROFILES? Why have more than one category here? AFTERTHOUGHT: The commandline automatic install possibilities need to be considered before adding GUI-stuff. Adding GUI-stuff is easy. Decoupling installation from GUI to allow command line automatic install is hard. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
postgresql-8.0.4-1 and 8.1.0-1 ready to upload
All suggestions from the previous threads are in: --dep cygserver --termsig INT [curr] http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/publ/cygwin/release/postgresql/postgresql-8.0.4-1.tar.bz2 6626006 38290bb1caad7720bb558126d26fb5ce http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/publ/cygwin/release/postgresql/postgresql-8.0.4-1-src.tar.bz2 10954952 697f4861e3660896e587c103423b155d [test] http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/publ/cygwin/release/postgresql/postgresql-8.1.0-1.tar.bz2 6846969 400b08d6dd7bd02ebcb7991ab365013c http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/publ/cygwin/release/postgresql/postgresql-8.1.0-1-src.tar.bz2 11403559 eb4807dbb3eb72ddabc5b662bc2dbb6e http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/publ/cygwin/release/postgresql/setup.hint 8.0.0cvs-1 and 7.4.3-1 can be deleted. This server is very slow, my old replacement for the still broken big machine. I usually need an overnight rsync loop to get them up successfully. And wonder if we really need 8.0 as curr, since 8.1 is e.g. much better in GiST locking, concurrency, crash-safe, esp. needed for tsearch2 and PostGIS, and the PGDATA's are incompatible, making upgrades a major pain. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release.html#RELEASE-8-1 http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/release-8-0-4.html -- Reini Urban
Please upload: boost-1.33.0-2
Packages: http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-1.33.0-2-src.tar.bz2 http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-1.33.0-2.tar.bz2 http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-devel-1.33.0-2.tar.bz2 Signatures: http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-1.33.0-2-src.tar.bz2.asc http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-1.33.0-2.tar.bz2.asc http://logout.sh.cvut.cz/~wilx/cygwin-boost/boost-devel-1.33.0-2.tar.bz2.asc Vaclav Haisman signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
Op Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:21:28 +0100 schreef Corinna Vinschen in 20051109162128.GA29765atcalimero.vinschen.de: [...] : Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest : view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in : almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category : view. Can storing the last view be added easily? It doesn't look hard... I've partly done it. If no-one starts jumping up and down saying ``Let me!'', I'll finish it. L8r, Buzz. [What about my other setup-patches? (I tested them. They WFM.)] -- ) | | ---/ ---/ Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not -- | | // really is | and false bits entirely.| mail for ) | | //a 72 by 4 +---+ any1 but -- \--| /--- /--- .sigfile. | |perl -pe s.u(z)\1.as.| me. 4^re
