This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: update just ruby on offline cygwin installation
- From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon at yandex dot ru>
- To: LMH <lmh_users-groups at molconn dot com>, cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:41:51 +0400
- Subject: Re: update just ruby on offline cygwin installation
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <53E3E248 dot 6070301 at molconn dot com> <53E3E71D dot 8090208 at cygwin dot com> <53E94499 dot 2080605 at molconn dot com> <44850477 dot 20140812030058 at yandex dot ru> <53E959CC dot 3010102 at molconn dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
> The problem I have is that cygwin has a tendency to remove depreciated
> packages when updating. This is an older setup and there are critical
> components in the build that are no longer available in more recent
> cygwin packages.
If this is a "critical setup", then you should have a test environment
replicating your setup, to do any experimentation before deploying changes on
That's the basics of "critical environment" handling.
> If I let cygwin just do it's thing, it will break far more that it will fix.
Following your logic, we should never upgrade, and use DOS 1.0 on our
> Updating the entire cygwin install would mean moving to more recent versions
> of multiple packages and who knows how much time, effort, and resources
> would be involved in fixing all of that.
Nobody know, unless someone try it.
This list only providing support for current packages.
We'll do our best to help you resolve any issues that might arise from
upgrade, but it's unlikely anyone would see into any issues coming from
> At the moment, the server does exactly what it needs to in its
> current configuration, so there is little sense in wading into the
> quagmire of updates when there is little or noting to be gained.
Fail logic. Worse, it's presumptuous. The gain is rather obvious: better
interprocess- and system compatibility.
I.e., for Cygwin itself - lots of fork-related fixes for the past year.
There's also many other packages, which have been fixed/upgraded for similar
To the more technical of your questions: yes, largely.
Andrey Repin (email@example.com) 12.08.2014, <04:30>
Sorry for my terrible english...
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple