This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Future releases and packages
- To: Andrew Dalgleish <andrewd at axonet dot com dot au>
- Subject: Re: Future releases and packages
- From: Chris Faylor <cgf at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 22:56:25 -0400
- Cc: "'cygwin at sourceware dot cygnus dot com'" <cygwin at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>
- References: <00F8D6E8AB0DD3118F1A006008186C9605DD64@server1.axonet.com.au>
- Reply-To: cygwin at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 12:03:29PM +1000, Andrew Dalgleish wrote:
>Finding volunteers is probably the least of your problems.
Well, I'm willing to be convinced, but I've mentioned this many times
and only one person has ever stepped forth.
>Will the packaging system have to support all possible installation
Since RPM is ported now, I think it is probably a good alternative.
I like dpkg, too. That has been ported in the past.
>It is possible to install cygwin in so (too?) many ways.
>I use a dedicated drive letter for my root mount and a full FHS-style
>Other users may want to use a sub-dir for the root, or a simpler
It doesn't really matter. You just specify where the root directory should
be. Then people can either say "c:\" or "i:\my\cygwin\stuff".
>Then there is the text vs binary issue for scripts, etc in each package.
>I'm fairly sure no current Linux package manager has to handle that. :-)
>(We have to support CR-NL in case the user edits a vital file using
>but we can't install text files if someone is using binary mounts.)
There is no issue to worry about when installing a package. Every installed
text file has to have \n endings. There is no alternative to this.
After installation, if someone wants to merrily go around setting directories
to text or binary mode, then they can do so.
>Should we say "We support X. If you want Y you are on your own."?
>There will still be a lot of list traffic for the "Frank Sinatra"
>"I did everything just like it said in the readme, except different
That's a good point. However, since the support will primarily be done
via the mailing list, we really don't have to worry about it, IMO.
If someone uses a wacky installation layout they won't have as much
of a chance of being answered but eventually Earnie will work up a series
of questions and put it on his web page and then we'll only have to say
"Go to Earnie's web page" repeatedly.
>Of course none of these are insurmountable problems, but they must be
>addressed up front.
The one question that you didn't ask was "GUI or not". I'd like to avoid
a GUI installer but a lot of people seem to think that's a bad idea.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org