Re: gcc4-core PACKAGE BUG

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>]

On 14/08/2010 19:19, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 08/14/2010 12:17 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>>   Come to think of it, wouldn't it be better to just update 4.3.4-3 in place
>> (i.e. without a version bump)?  It seems a bit much to force everyone who's
>> already got it installed to redownload that many megabytes just for the sake
>> of a couple of 'x' bits.
> 
> No, that would only work for people who haven't downloaded it yet, or
> who explicitly reinstall.

  Yes, that's the point.  The main motivation for the update at all is to stop
setup.exe reporting an error in the postinstall script stage.  Anyone who's
already got it installed isn't going to be bothered by that and would be
inconvenienced by being forced to redownload the whole thing just in order to
run a script.

> A version bump seems like the best way to ensure it gets picked up
> without any effort on the user's part.  Too bad we don't have anything
> comparable to yum's presto mode that makes delta downloading easier for
> simple things like adding an x bit.

  I don't think actually fixing the x bit is that important, it's just the
scary-and-offputting-to-noobs setup.exe error that needs fixing.  As for the
actual script itself, I think that anyone who's already got GCC installed and
has been running it probably isn't bothered by the problem.  I've had to
mention it maybe half a dozen times on the list, but haven't had any new
reports in ages.  It's simple enough to tell folks to chmod or source it manually.

  So I really don't think it's worth the end-user's while in this instance,
but I'd like to hear what Corinna and cgf think before I proceed.

    cheers,
      DaveK