This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps 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: ITP dos2unix 5.2.1-1

On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 04:05:17PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>On 3/16/2011 3:32 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 08:29:51PM +0100, Christian Franke wrote:
>>> An alternative would be to modify cygutils+dos2unix packages such that 
>>> the user can select the flavor of dos2unix/unix2dos commands with 
>>> /usr/sbin/alternatives. If cygutils is the default if installed this 
>>> should not break anything.
>Except you would no longer be able to run dos2unix/unix2dos/d2u/u2d from
>a non-cygwin context, such as 'naked' cmd.exe or some IDE like Eclipse.
>> Hey, good idea, assuming that Chuck is amenable.  I'd be happy to just
>> let the package in given that proviso if so.
>Uh, let's think about that a minute.
>cygutils is pulled in as part of Base (cygutils is not in the Base
>category, but it is required by a packages that is: cygwin-doc).  Adding
>alternatives as a dep of cygutils would then make alternatives an
>implicit part of Base.  alternatives itself brings in no other unsavory
>This would be a change, since although alternatives is used by some very
>common packages [vim, automake], it's not in the default Base-"only"
>(actually, Base+requirements) installation.
>It also means that cygwin's dos2unix could no longer be executed from a
>non-cygwin context, because of the symlinks.
>Finally, Eric Blake already referenced this possibility, I think: "I see
>no reason to repackage it as an alternative build."
>If everybody else is ok with that, then I have no objections...but I
>think we should hear from folks about these (possible) issues before
>making a decision.

Ah, right.

I didn't get that Eric was referring to this scenario but, regardless,
I should have remembered that alternatives means using symlinks.  Given
the use that d2u is put, I don't think we want to make it a symlink.

So, I guess that means that we poll the community if we want to go ahead
with this.  Either that or the binaries in the new package are given a
different name to avoid conflicts.


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