setup as a general purpose installer?

Robert Collins robert.collins@itdomain.com.au
Tue Aug 28 00:14:00 GMT 2001


On 28 Aug 2001 00:55:32 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> It is with gritted teeth that I ask this question:
> 
> Is anyone interested in discussing the issues in making setup
> into a general purpose installer?
> 
> There are a few obvious issues in doing this.  I'm inclined to
> think that we should be getting setup.exe to work better as
> a cygwin installer rather than defocusing to ensure that it
> can easily install packages from other projects.  Either that
> or we scrap everything and move to rpm.

IMO, if other projects want to use the installer, fine. It's nearly
generic enough as it is (-src being the exception). I don't believe
other defocusing is needed to allow support for any project, with only
one exception - make the master .ini and mirror list file location a
./configure option.

Given that, there should be no need for changes to setup.exe to allow it
to install arbitrary packages for cygwin.

As for installing non-cygwin stuff onto win32, ugh. All the logic is
geared for unix file tree mechanics, I think grafting c:\ stuff in there
would be remarkably ugly. That said I've no objection to it being done -
by someone else - if it is done cleanly - so that further hacking for
cygwin won't be a chore..
 
> However, I actually, do have a need to be able to use setup.exe
> internally at Red Hat with other "non-standard" mirror locations, so
> if/when I implement that, part of the problem will be rectified.
> 
> Or, is it possible that by thinking more "globally" we might improve
> setup.exe's robustness?

Good point. Yes we would - just not win32 paths _please_.

Rob



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list