This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [HEADSUP] Let's start a Cygwin 1.7 release area
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I would suggest to use a setup subkey, because you might find that
> you have to store more than one value at one point. It would be
> cleaner this way, imho. And originally we came up with the version
> number, too, so what about "setup-2" or "setup"?
Traditionally setup has stored all of its state in files under
/etc/setup. I think this is a good thing to continue, since it makes it
easy to access and manipulate them from scripts. Given that we're
moving the mount table out of the registry and into /etc, I don't see
why we'd want to do the reverse with setup's bits. So in that sense, I
don't see a need for a subkey that will only ever have one key.
On the other hand, I'd hate for a bad decision now to make things
annoying in the future. Let me ask this: what's the layout for the
other items that will still be in the registry? Are we still looking
This is kind of ugly too, we have a mix of things with spaces and
underscores. How about the following:
I really don't know.
(The version number I think is implicit in the fact that this is a
totally new key that's never been used before. If in the very distant
future setup needs yet another namespace it can have a "setup-2" subkey