Just a note:
I've moved mklink2.c to a .cc file to bypass the 'not a
prototype' error that folk with recent w32api installs may have seen.
Rob
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 07:27:57PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
You don't. You find some other method for reverting to
software that is 1 revision old. This is not a hardship.
AFAIK, setup has never allowed you to do more than prev/curr/test.
Not from the net. It does locally though
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: prev/curr/test
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 07:27:57PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
You don't. You find some other method for
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:01:11AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
cgf wrote:
Ok. So, this is recent then. It certainly never allowed it
prior to this.
It -sortof- did. If you *don't have* a setup.ini, then it scanned for
everything..
I wrote the code. I know what it did. There were only
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 12:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: prev/curr/test
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:01:11AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
cgf wrote:
Ok. So, this is recent then. It
I think we've done it. So Chuck, feel free to break everyone who's
lagging behind :}..
Rob
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: setup all ok now
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:15:53PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
I think we've done
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:15:53PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
I think we've done it. So Chuck, feel free to break everyone who's
lagging behind :}..
Shouldn't we wait a day or two and let the new setup.exe work its
way through the system?
don't worry -- I
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:22:27PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
How about this. Replace the current prev/curr/test radio buttons with a
drop-down list box containing not metapackages but installation templates,
with names like:
Workstation
Heavy-Duty Workstation
Server
Bare Bones Setup
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:40 PM
It's an interesting idea but I don't like glumping what used
to be prev/curr/test with the concept of packages or meta
packages. You lose some functionality that
Hi Keith,
I hope I haven't stolen your thunder, but I've checked into HEAD
the framework for command line options for setup. I've not used what you
put together, because it was too procedural.
Instead, we have:
GetOption - a singleton class that abstracts the getopt() mechanics.
Each
11 matches
Mail list logo
