On 10/05/2016 07:20, Andrew Schulman wrote:
If this is what's happened, we need to update https://cygwin.com/setup.html with
the new information (the page is overdue for an overhaul anyway).
I agree that page is very bad at communicating the information it needs
to communicate. Perhaps it
> Andrew Schulman writes:
> > I feel as though I've once again missed some important discussion about
> > package
> > maintenance. Your question implies that we can now upload packages with
> > arch
> > "noarch". Is that true?
>
> Meanwhile it has become true, although Jon and Yaakov are
Andrew Schulman writes:
> I feel as though I've once again missed some important discussion about
> package
> maintenance. Your question implies that we can now upload packages with arch
> "noarch". Is that true?
Meanwhile it has become true, although Jon and Yaakov are still in the
early
> After a discussion on IRC about de-duping the noarch content out of
> package files (where I was told this would be too difficult), I've just
> tried what would happen for two of my packages, maxima and perl.
I feel as though I've once again missed some important discussion about package
Jon Turney writes:
> I've deployed an updated calm, and moved perl-Test-Base to noarch.
Thanks.
> From my brief testing, setup handles this layout with no problems. I
> also checked that noarch files in a download package directory shared
> between x86 and x86_64 setup works as expected.
>
>
Jon Turney writes:
> I think 'generally' is over-stating the case, the vast majority of
> source packages should be arch-less.
I said "not generally", which I think makes a slightly less sweeping
statement. In any case, I just wanted to point out that some of the
existing source packages have
On 23/04/2016 16:43, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
The src packages would ideally be in a src subdir, parallel to the
noarch and $arch dirs.
Hmm, I'm not sure I'd like that.
The src packages are not generally arch-less. There are several
examples where either the cygport
On 23/04/2016 15:19, Achim Gratz wrote:
Jon Turney writes:
I think I have implemented the changes to calm to support
all-or-nothing noarch (i.e. where all packages produced from a source
package must be noarch), so if you can nominate a suitable,
unimportant perl package, we can test it with
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> The src packages would ideally be in a src subdir, parallel to the
> noarch and $arch dirs.
Hmm, I'm not soure I'd like that.
The src packages are not generally arch-less. There are several
examples where either the cygport files, the patches or even the source
On Apr 23 16:19, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Jon Turney writes:
> > I think I have implemented the changes to calm to support
> > all-or-nothing noarch (i.e. where all packages produced from a source
> > package must be noarch), so if you can nominate a suitable,
> > unimportant perl package, we can test
On 16/04/2016 11:03, Achim Gratz wrote:
After a discussion on IRC about de-duping the noarch content out of
package files (where I was told this would be too difficult), I've just
I think it was more along the lines of 'not yet' :)
In any case, we need noarch support in calm, before it's
Achim Gratz writes:
> Looking at the current repo content we'd save about 30GB from the dedup
> of the src abd doc packages alone and probably about 20GB from dedup in
> the remaining packages.
I've implemented some POC code and deduped my Cygwin mirror (it is
missing most of KDE and the
After a discussion on IRC about de-duping the noarch content out of
package files (where I was told this would be too difficult), I've just
tried what would happen for two of my packages, maxima and perl. Maxima
is practically a noarch package, save for the clisp memory image. Perl
has gobs and
13 matches
Mail list logo
