This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: has anyone tried latest setup.exe from cvs ?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com>
To: <cygwin-apps@cygwin.com>
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: has anyone tried latest setup.exe from cvs ?


> On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 10:52:11AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g.r.vansickle@worldnet.att.net>
> >>i.e., that have no "version:" lines in them (what is such an entry
> >>supposed to mean, or is this actually a upset bug?).  The parser
then
> >>never creates a
> >
> >Chris, do you consider version: to be mandatory for setup.ini files?
> >
> >setup.html doesn't specify (AFAICT) whether version: is optional or
> >mandatory.  If the decision hasn't been made, I'd prefer mandatory.
>
> It's optional for setup.exe, certainly.  There are a few packages for
> which there is no version: info.  I think I nuked one of them
yesterday,
> though.

Ah. I'll make setup.exe robust again - at the moment it dies if there is
no version: entry for a package in setup.ini.

Thanks,
Rob


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]