setup.exe in unattended mode. Possible problems handling dependencies

[Shaddy Baddah <lithium-cygwin at shaddybaddah dot name>]

Hi,

I have been trying to upgrade my cygwin package from 1.7.17-1 to
1.7.18-1 via command-line/unattended mode. This is the command line I
used:

setup.exe -q -s http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/sourceware/cygwin/ -R 
S:/cygwin/ -D -l C:/Users/Public/Downloads/cygwin_setup_area/ -P cygwin

Using this command, cygwin-1.7.18-1.tar.bz2 is not being download. So a
subsequent attempt to install from local directory obviously fails.

What I have found is that in regular UI mode, I can select just cygwin
package, and I will be prompted to "Resolving Dependencies". From there
of course the cygwin package is downloaded.

Looking into the code, and without an intimate understanding of it, I
gather this might be an artifact of when the chooser dialog
automatically toggled dependant packages. I feel this bit of code from
prereq.cc 
(http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/setup/prereq.cc?annotate=2.9&cvsroot=cygwin-apps):

2.9          |jturney    146: long
             |           147: PrereqPage::OnUnattended ()
             |           148: {
             |           149:   // in chooser-only mode, show this page 
so the user can choose to fix dependency problems or not
             |           150:   if (unattended_mode == chooseronly)
             |           151:     return -1;
             |           152:
             |           153:   // in unattended mode, carry on to 
download/install
             |           154:   // (this can only happen if there some 
kind of problem with dependencies, as all required dependencies
             |           155:   //  should be selected automatically by 
the chooser page in unattended mode, so we should never get here)
             |           156:   return whatNext();
             |           157: }

The comment "this can only happen... should be select automatically" is
what gives me this suggestion.

I any case, I can't use unattended mode in the same way as
chooseronly(?).

--
Thanks,
Shaddy