This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 15:37:47 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
- References: <Pine.GSO.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>As the latest installment in the recent series of major "D'oh!"s, I
>realized that the installation profiles I previously proposed for setup
>could be initially implemented as special packages with the right
>dependences. This still doesn't absolve us from adding some more
>sophisticated support for these in setup (e.g., communicating the user
>prerefence about creating desktop icons to them), but it's a start, and
>it'll cut down on the "I installed Cygwin, so how come gcc doesn't work"
>(and the much more annoying "just install everything, it's only 2 gigs"
>answers to those).
>IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the
>name "@Profiles" to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if
>setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile
>packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding
>setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory
>(thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2
>files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are
>Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages
>are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed
>something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles,
>though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much
Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in
I'd like to get some consensus on the name "Profiles", though. Is that