upset vs. genini, release-2 hint files

Charles Wilson
Fri May 29 00:34:00 GMT 2009

Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 07:00:47PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:38:22PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>#1) should upset also be made strict (which would mean a massive audit
>>>of release-2 setup.hint files, and perhaps also an audit of the actual
>>>.tar.bz2 files under release-2)
>>No, upset specifically doesn't care if source files are missing.
>>>#2) OR, should genini be made more lax, like upset?
>>Why not add an option?
>Oh, and what does this have to do with cygwin-developers?  This seems like
>cygwin-apps fodder.

You're right. I was replying to a thread that was already on-list, but
in fact it seems the entire thing -- the "upset vs. genini" subthread,
and the original "[1.7] packaging problem? Both /usr/bin/ and /usr/lib/
are non-empty" threads belonged over there.

Future followups to both (sub)threads will be on cygwin-apps. Sorry for
the noise.

I'll look into adding the appropriate "ignore missing -src" option to
genini and post it to cygwin-apps.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list