GNU emacs 21.2-3 packages available

[Robert Collins]

On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 00:34, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote:
> >
> What I mean to say is that, despite one's best efforts, compiled source 
> doesn't always behave as one had intended.  Of course it will act as it 
> is written, it just may not seem apparent that the way it acts != the 
> way you intended it to act.

Now that, that I agree with.
 

> >Yes. And it should. You've also prodded me into finding a bug. Thanks.
> >
> Why is this behaviour considiered a bug?  It seems quite logical to me. 
>  It allows for the usage that Corinna had desired.  Otherwise, there is 
> no way to garuntee that updating a package later in the alphabet won't 
> trump an earlier update's install.  Pretty handy when you want to fix a 
> conflicting package f*$kup.

Because it's actually worse. The cause of the conflicting package f***up
is setup not checking for conflicts. So that can and will be addressed
in other fashions.

The reason to make upgrades atomic and done one package at a time is
to deal with cases like the following:
A pre-removal script (which *should* trigger on upgrades) may require
binaries from another package being upgraded. Unless that other package
is installed again at the time of the pre-removal script triggering, bad
things will happen.

Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/attachments/20020813/bde31a7f/attachment.sig>