Re: Setup 2.249.2.5 usage hurdles

[Robert Collins <rbcollins at cygwin dot com>]

On Sun, 2002-09-15 at 14:54, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> There are two issues with the current version of setup:
> 
> 1) Summary: When the installed package is two versions behind the
> currently available one, clicking through the values in the "New" column
> in both Full and Partial views loses some values on the second and
> subsequent passes through.
> 
> Details: I have bash-2.05b-3 installed.  The current version available is
> 2.05b-5, and the previous is 2.05b-4.  In both Full and Partial views,
> clicking on the New column cycles through the following values:
>    2.05b-5 (with the Bin? checkbox selected)

default - update installed packages.

>    Source (with both Bin? and Src? set to "n/a")

most common non-default action - grab the source

>    Reinstall

should be rare these days, but unlike some package managers we make it
easy :}.

>    2.05b-4 (with both Bin? and Src? unselected)

none of the above? maybe you wantto downgrade?

>    Uninstall

or remove it ?

>    Keep

ok, we'll do nothing.

>    2.05b-4

hmm. This is wrong. I'll see if I can track it down. I don't recall it
doing this to me, and I've been round the loop many times. Hmm.


> I'm not sure if this is a bug, but I thought
> I'd report it.

It is. At a guess it's because your current version isn't in the
setup.ini. At a *guess*.
 
> 2) Summary: No way to install source of the previous package version
> without uninstalling the current binary version.

This is be design. If you want the source to a different version, either
install that version first, or install a source-only version.

The interface needs a major overhaul to make multi-version actions
intuitive, and until then (which no one is planning just now AFAIK) it
would be to confusing IMO.

> Those were the major issues, but while we're on feature requests, it would
> be nice to have "Keep" follow the latest version in the "New" column
> clickthrough, so to keep from installing the newest version one would only
> need one click (one could get to "Source" by just selecting the "Src?"
> checkbox, so this won't slow down people who just want to install the
> source).  This issue is not too important, but is mildly anoying.  I could
> probably provide a patch for this one, and if the maintainers don't get to
> it at some point, I just might (and given my unfamiliarity with the code,
> the patch might be horrible -- you may take this as a threat ;-))

No threat needed. horrible patches get filed in the octagonal bin :].
Last I heard, we don't *want* people staying on old versions
indefinately. It's certainly up to the user, but it's not encouraged. In
fact the bug reporting page encourages users to upgrade IIRC.
 
> On the whole, though, thanks for all the great work, and sorry for the
> rant.

Thanks, and no probs.

Rob

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part