setup revisit

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "DJ Delorie" <dj@delorie.com>
To: <robert.collins@itdomain.com.au>
Cc: <cygwin-developers@cygwin.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: setup revisit


>
> > Thus I'm willing to try and build rpm into a library linked into
> > setup.exe
>
> That would be fine.  It's OK to have setup support other package
> formats, as long as the user doesn't need to know that it's doing
> that.  But even RPM has a master file similar to setup.ini.
>
> > Ah. So if we use the same source, there's no issue.
>
> Easier said than done.  One problem with the original setup is that
> the tar and gzip (and cygwin) packages got updated occasionally, and
> every time that happened, someone had to remember to rebuild setup.

Easier done than said in this case. I'm proposing that the current
setup.__ini__ be stripped to only include the bootstrap files. So
setup.exe *never* gets rebuilt (for those reasons). It is data driven.
I've got no issues with the layout or approach setup.exe has taken -
just the replication of effort. This covers the issue for RPM's master
file concept as well - setup.ini includes a pointer to the RPM database
(which gets mirrored).

>
> > Sorry for my shorthand - "the link to" should be prefixed by "in a
> > bootstrap environment ".
>
> One problem with the original setup is that it didn't include the
> source trees.  The developer had to have the binaries installed, and
> the Makefile pulled them from your bin directory.  That made keeping
> track of the right sources even harder.
>

I've just seen Chris' response.. that does seem rather complex. I think
I'm taking a much simpler approach.

Rob