Christopher Faylor wrote:
I'm not as concerned about the package management as I am about the
UI, actually. If we don't have a good UI for initial install, then
the initial user experience is still going to be painful.
You may want to take a look at my pre-release RPM distribution I did
back in
You do have to have something early on that bootstraps
what you need, like setup.exe does now, but it could
always install the cygwin first before it does
anything.
Yes, once we had yum, we could almost have the unattended
install working. Of course, you couldn't use yum to install
Warren Young wrote:
Rebooting is a cop-out in this case. All the setup program
has to do is stop running services before starting the upgrade.
I didn't mean to imply that rebooting was the best solution,
just that there may be some extra steps involved when you do
the base Cygwin install.
One issue that sometimes pops up currently is the failure of
post-install scripts when Cygwin's DLL is being replaced. I
know that you can run into trouble if a daemon is currently
using the DLL when you update the cygwin package, at least.
Perhaps a two-part install wouldn't be that bad, as long
Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote:
installer when needed/requested. The base Cygwin installer
could then be done using MSI or whatever and could initiate
reboots/etc. as needed before starting the package updater.
Rebooting is a cop-out in this case. All the setup program has to do is
stop
Warren Young wrote:
stop running services before starting the upgrade.
Thinking more about it, couldn't you just call LoadLibrary() on the full
path to cygwin.dll, and if that succeeds, get the process list from it
and send out kill signals?
If LoadLibrary() doesn't succeed, either Cygwin isn't
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:25:09PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
Warren Young wrote:
stop running services before starting the upgrade.
Thinking more about it, couldn't you just call LoadLibrary() on the
full path to cygwin.dll, and if that succeeds, get the process list
from it and send out kill
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:25:09PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
Warren Young wrote:
stop running services before starting the upgrade.
Thinking more about it, couldn't you just call LoadLibrary() on the
full path to cygwin.dll, and if that
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 15:16 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I believe that it was always Robert's intention to work towards the use
of a true package manager someday. That time is now. I can't take it
anymore.
Ack.
Rob
--
GPG key available at: http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt.
BTW: There is new Conectiva packager, which should be the best,
and builds out of the box.
http://zorked.net/smart/FAQ.html
Requires python.
Works with .rpm, .deb and pkgtool files and
up2date- and Conectiva-style mirror description formats.
I don't like python that much, but I try how to
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 02:52:30PM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
BTW: There is new Conectiva packager, which should be the best,
and builds out of the box.
http://zorked.net/smart/FAQ.html
Requires python.
Works with .rpm, .deb and pkgtool files and
up2date- and Conectiva-style mirror description
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 02:52:30PM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
BTW: There is new Conectiva packager, which should be the best,
and builds out of the box.
http://zorked.net/smart/FAQ.html
Requires python.
Works with .rpm, .deb and pkgtool files and
up2date- and
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
As loath as I am to admit it, I think that setup.exe should be scrapped
in favor of one of the other setup projects out there. We just aren't
doing a good job of keeping up in the innovation or the tech support
department.
I know the reasons that all of the above exist
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 08:58:41PM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
As loath as I am to admit it, I think that setup.exe should be scrapped
in favor of one of the other setup projects out there. We just aren't
doing a good job of keeping up in the innovation or the tech
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I believe that it was always Robert's intention to work towards the use
of a true package manager someday. That time is now. I can't take it
anymore.
Perhaps it's time to begin work on a native port of rpm.exe -- but to
avoid any where exactly IS /var/lib/rpm before
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:48:17PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:37:36PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I believe that it was always Robert's intention to work towards the use
of a true package manager someday. That time is now. I can't
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:17:55PM +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:48:17PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:37:36PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I believe that it was always Robert's intention to work towards the use
of
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:17:55PM +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:48:17PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:37:36PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
I believe that it was always Robert's intention to
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:50:36PM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:17:55PM +0100, Marcel Telka wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:48:17PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:37:36PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher
Christopher Faylor wrote:
That's right. RPM does not have Recommends, and that would be nice. It isn't
designed to be UI based, though.
Is this a real problem?
Wouldn't the eventual solution still have to have a setup.ini-like file,
that at least lists all the available packages? You can use
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:25:11PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
That's right. RPM does not have Recommends, and that would be nice.
It isn't designed to be UI based, though.
Is this a real problem?
Wouldn't the eventual solution still have to have a setup.ini-like
file,
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 03:37:36PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
Perhaps it's time to begin work on a native port of rpm.exe -- but to
avoid any where exactly IS /var/lib/rpm before cygwin is even
installed problems, maybe winrpm.exe should store ALL of its stuff in
HKCU
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:50:36PM +0100, Reini Urban wrote:
But rpm doesn't handle Recommends and other UI interactions
other UI packagers offer. But better than nothing or our current setup.ini.
That's right. RPM does not have Recommends, and that would be nice. It
23 matches
Mail list logo
