This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Less fails with link error
- From: David Balazic <david dot balazic at hermes dot si>
- To: "'cygwin at cygwin dot com'" <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 18:48:56 +0200
- Subject: RE: Less fails with link error
> From: Ronald
> Reply To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Sent: 6. avgust 2003 18:58
> To: David Balazic
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Less fails with link error
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:07:32PM +0200, David Balazic wrote:
> > > Cycling through the versions is a dangerous thing these days - you
> > > only
> > Is there any other way to get from some version selection back to "Skip"
> > If it is dangerous, then it should be disabled or accompanied with a
> > warning.
> Nope - but you usually don't want to do that :) - you only want to do that
> what you have is working..
I don't understand what you are saying.
> > > do it if you know what you're doing. The version Setup proposes is the
> > > you
> > > should normally use, because it's the one the maintainer wants you to
> > > The
> > > maintainer is usually right about what you should use..
> > There was no note saying that the maintainer prefers one version over
> > another.
> > They all were offered to choose from.
> Of course, but the one proposed by default by Setup is the one the
> prefers.. otherwise, Setup would propose something else..
What do you mean by proposed ?
As I said, they were all "equal" and the default selection was "Skip" ( or
is the default "do not install" setting )
> > > > > You used Setup to install, didn't you?
> > > > yes.
> > > > > Use cygcheck to get the version of less, then :)
> > > > I llearned something new.
> > > > rpm would catch the incompatibility though :-)
> > > versioned dependencies in Setup are a work-in-progress *and* require
> > > maintainers to put them in the setup.hint files. Neither is magic.
> > >
> > > IIRC, rpm doesn't use any wizzardry either: versioned dependencies are
> > > maintainer's job.
> > >
> > > As for the state of progress on versioned dependencies in Setup
> > > you
> > > ask) IIRC it needs testing more than anything else - but one of the
> > > people will surely correct me if I'm wrong..
> > >
> > Well I guess I just tested it :-)
> Nope, you didn't, unless you added the versioned dependency to setup.hint,
> regenerated setup.ini, etc.
No, I tested it and it failed the test due to missing config data. :-)
> cgf asked this thread to stop - let's do that :)
> Beam me up, Scotty! It ate my phaser!
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html