Christopher Faylor cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin.com writes:
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 03:04:24AM -0400, Arturus Magi wrote:
Jani Tiainen wrote:
Why to reinvent wheel..?
You could use existing systems, like Debian package-system (deb),
RPM-system like Fedora Core/RedHat, or
Bill Hughes wrote:
YaST from SUSE is now GPL and handles dependencies quite well, the reason I
mention it is that as an alternative to the more normal 'pretty' gui it also
has a text mode gui-ish interface which may work better with a screen
reader/magnifier.
I think that as long as we stick
Message -
From: Brian Dessent [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 5:42 AM
Subject: Re: setup alternatives (was Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance
of setup.exe when setup.ini is absent)
Bill Hughes wrote:
YaST from SUSE is now GPL and handles
Sean McMahon wrote:
Is there a cygwin port for this yast which will install cygwin packages? I
No.
should point out that some of the controlls in setup.exe work. The initial
buttons for selecting install from internet, the next and back buttons, the
finnish button. It's really the main
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 12:57:03AM +0100, Cliff Hones wrote:
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
...
[Yet more boring vitriolic rubbish.]
...
I've been on this list for a good four years now, and never ever
considered setting up a filter. I came close during the
Jani Tiainen wrote:
Why to reinvent wheel..?
You could use existing systems, like Debian package-system (deb),
RPM-system like Fedora Core/RedHat, or Gentoo's Emerge.
I also seem to recall someone using apt-get in Cygwin-space at one time,
but Google doesn't want to be my friend today.
--
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 03:04:24AM -0400, Arturus Magi wrote:
Jani Tiainen wrote:
Why to reinvent wheel..?
You could use existing systems, like Debian package-system (deb),
RPM-system like Fedora Core/RedHat, or Gentoo's Emerge.
I also seem to recall someone using apt-get in Cygwin-space at one
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:39 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: setup alternatives (was Re: Bespoke installations: simple
elegance of setup.exe when setup.ini is absent)
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:57:18PM -0700, Sean McMahon
Original Message
From: Cliff Hones
Sent: 03 May 2005 00:57
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
...
[Yet more boring vitriolic rubbish.]
...
I've been on this list for a good four years now, and never ever
considered setting up a filter. I came close during the fortune
flamewars and I'm
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:39 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: setup alternatives (was Re: Bespoke installations: simple
elegance of setup.exe when setup.ini is absent)
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:57
Jani Tiainen wrote:
Why to reinvent wheel..?
You could use existing systems, like Debian package-system (deb),
RPM-system like Fedora Core/RedHat, or Gentoo's Emerge.
All working, proven technologies.
Would you like to have a go at porting one of them to Windows, then?
Also, what about a GUI?
I
Max Bowsher kirjoitti:
Jani Tiainen wrote:
Why to reinvent wheel..?
You could use existing systems, like Debian package-system (deb),
RPM-system like Fedora Core/RedHat, or Gentoo's Emerge.
All working, proven technologies.
Would you like to have a go at porting one of them to Windows, then?
. Many of the buttons
and controlls do not get focus and can't be opperated in the normal manner.
- Original Message -
From: Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of setup.exe when
PROTECTED]
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:58 PM
Subject: RE: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of
setup.exe when setup.ini is absent
[snip]
Ahem. As one of the many people responsible for setup, I
take issue with
the accusation that it is either simple
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean McMahon
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 2:57 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of
setup.exe when setup.ini is absent
I for one appreciate
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:57:18PM -0700, Sean McMahon wrote:
I for one appreciate the clarification as I sent a detailed bug-report
to this person assuming they were the maintainer. My question as I've
asked before is, can or is someone working on improving accessibility
of setup.exe for those
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:39:51PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
- I am glad that Chris' comments clarified that. Let us all hope that he
applies this helpful service across the board, and not just for those who
call him on his often bizarre behavior here. Well, except for the false
What about http://sourceforge.net/projects/wix/?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:39 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: setup alternatives (was Re: Bespoke installations: simple
elegance
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, 20:58:44 -0500 Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
As one of the many people responsible for setup...
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
- I am responsible for a good portion of setup's UI. It used to be a series
of dialog boxes. It is now a Wizard-style UI. I did
-Original Message-
From: Brian Ford
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 5:45 PM
To: Gary R. Van Sickle
Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: RE: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of
setup.exe when setup.ini is absent
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, 20:58:44 -0500 Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
As one
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:16 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of
setup.exe when setup.ini is absent
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 03:39:51PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
- I am glad that Chris' comments
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
...
[Yet more boring vitriolic rubbish.]
...
I've been on this list for a good four years now, and never ever
considered setting up a filter. I came close during the fortune
flamewars and I'm getting even more close now. Please, Gary and CGF,
can you take your
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 12:57:03AM +0100, Cliff Hones wrote:
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
...
[Yet more boring vitriolic rubbish.]
...
I've been on this list for a good four years now, and never ever
considered setting up a filter. I came close during the fortune
flamewars and I'm getting even
Chris, why are you doing this to yourself?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 9:54 PM
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Bespoke installations: simple elegance of
setup.exe when
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 09:21:08PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Chris, why are you doing this to yourself?
Come on, GRVS. You know the answer to that! It's fun!
I'm also doing it to help you, as I have repeatedly stated. You now
have the outlet you've been craving for almost two years.
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:37:38AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 09:21:08PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Chris, why are you doing this to yourself?
Come on, GRVS. You know the answer to that! It's fun!
I'm also doing it to help you, as I have repeatedly stated.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 08:58:44PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
[snip]
Ahem. As one of the many people responsible for setup, I take issue with
the accusation that it is either simple or elegant.
;-)
In this case, responsible for setup == submitted some patches in 2003
and ignored most
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 08:58:44PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
[snip]
Ahem. As one of the many people responsible for setup, I take issue
with the accusation that it is either simple or elegant.
;-)
In this case, responsible for setup == submitted some
patches in 2003 and
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 07:06:43PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 08:58:44PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
[snip]
Ahem. As one of the many people responsible for setup, I take issue
with the accusation that it is either simple or elegant.
;-)
In this
About 3 years ago the then available setup.exe used to work as follows; for
some quite long period since, it didn't (the installation hung); now it's
back to its old (possibly unintended) functionality.
Or so it seems to me. Can anybody confirm?
To install Cygwin in full or in part, place all
[snip]
Ahem. As one of the many people responsible for setup, I take issue with
the accusation that it is either simple or elegant.
;-)
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
31 matches
Mail list logo
