At 11:30 AM 3/19/2002, Michael Bale wrote:
>Downloaded a few additional (cron, make, vim, ssmtp).
>The default setup action is to skip the extras.
>Would like the default to be install.
>Can I change setup.exe behavior?
Yes, but you'll want to review the email list archives for a discussion
of
Rob,
[ Our mails are crossing, so just know that I've read both the post I'm
replying to directly here and the subsequent amplification. I think we are
mostly just agreeing, albeit loudly. ]
>It did *what* ? How do you reproduce it?
Grumble. That must be an even-day bug, because when I went
Sorry about the length, just wanted to be really clear...
===
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Basically, the reason we've been harping that "setup is not a
mirroring
> tool" is to preserve the freedom to change setup's on-disk database
and
> operational b
- Original Message -
From: "Randall R Schulz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Randall R Schulz wrote:
> >
> >>I tried the NEW setup. Let's say it has some problems still. I'll
switch
> >>when the kinks are worked out.
> >
> >
> >Okay, so when you said "how can I..." you meant "I know it's supposed
Chuck,
At 16:33 2002-03-01, you wrote:
>[please don't send me personal email related to cygwin. Keep it on the list]
>
>Randall R Schulz wrote:
>
>>I tried the NEW setup. Let's say it has some problems still. I'll switch
>>when the kinks are worked out.
>
>
>Okay, so when you said "how can I...
Randall R Schulz wrote:
> At 16:33 2002-03-01, you wrote:
>
>> [please don't send me personal email related to cygwin. Keep it on
>> the list]
>
>
>
> Just following your lead.
Huh? Wha...??? Oh, I see. My earlier messages were "reply to all" --
which meant they were sent (a) directly
At 16:33 2002-03-01, you wrote:
>[please don't send me personal email related to cygwin. Keep it on the list]
Just following your lead.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.co
[please don't send me personal email related to cygwin. Keep it on the
list]
Randall R Schulz wrote:
> I tried the NEW setup. Let's say it has some problems still. I'll switch
> when the kinks are worked out.
Okay, so when you said "how can I..." you meant "I know it's supposed to
work, bu
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Perhaps the Emacs folks (NOT XEmacs -- they already have a different
> solution) will create a cygwin-setup dirtree once their
> cygwin port is
> complete. Perhaps folks who have ported a package and want
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> I cannot get setup.exe to permit multiple selection of
> mirrors, so how is
> this magical seamless multi-mirror integration achieved? Can
> it be done
> without running setup.exe more than once? If not, wha
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Can you tell me some functionality only available when one uses
> > "Install
> > from Internet?"
>
>
> Sure: merging multiple "mirrors" into a seamless single-view
> installation. (Or, merging an official m
Randall R Schulz wrote:
> Chuck,
>
> I cannot get setup.exe to permit multiple selection of mirrors, so how
> is this magical seamless multi-mirror integration achieved? Can it be
> done without running setup.exe more than once?
Yes -- you should be able to shift-click or ctrl-click select
Mark Sheppard writes:
> Surely if you were bothering to make a CD you'd want to include
> everything anyway, thus you wouldn't need dependency checking.
>
Thus qoth the man behind a fat pipe. I don't know about the original
poster's situation, but if you use a modem connection the dependency
Chuck,
I cannot get setup.exe to permit multiple selection of mirrors, so how is
this magical seamless multi-mirror integration achieved? Can it be done
without running setup.exe more than once? If not, what's the advantage over
separate download and install?
Furthermore, why doesn't the mult
Randall R Schulz wrote:
> I don't understand this. You get maximum flexibility by separate
> "Download from Internet" and "Install from Local Directory" operations.
> That way you can download sources and have them at hand without
> unconditionally installing them.
>
> By copying my local in
Surely if you were bothering to make a CD you'd want to include
everything anyway, thus you wouldn't need dependency checking.
Mark.
-Original Message-
From: Markus Hoenicka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 01 March 2002 15:51
To: Randall R Schulz; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Randall,
the original poster's suggestion was not to use setup.exe to download
the packages, but rather a linux box. This way you lose the dependency
tracking in setup.exe (it does not run on Linux afaik), and to
make sure you don't miss a dependency and thus waste a CD you'd have
to download *al
Markus,
At 07:31 2002-03-01, Markus Hoenicka wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Toni Mueller writes:
> > So my current guess is that I can download some stuff using eg. my Linux
> > workstation, put them on CD and then move the CD to the W2k box for
> > local installation there. Can anyone please confirm that? Ca
Toni Mueller wrote:
> So my current guess is that I can download some stuff using eg. my Linux
> workstation, put them on CD and then move the CD to the W2k box for
> local installation there. Can anyone please confirm that? Can anyone
Have you looked at the current version of setup.exe at all. I
19 matches
Mail list logo
