This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 11/08/2014 12:44, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 10 23:55, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:On 2014-08-10 15:33, Marco Atzeri wrote:I was looking at the needed maintenance of cygwin-pkg-maint, crossing the data of x86 setup.ini with cygwin-pkg-maint and I found 2 main classes of mismatch plus a minor oneThanks for taking the time to look into this!Ditto!
Marco, if you're interested, please go ahead and add the missing *source* packages and fix those typos, but please hold off on removing anything until we hear from Corinna.No worries, this all makes sense to me. The original list was based on some automatism to fetch the info and then had to be kept in shape manually and naturally deteriorated. Let's keep the base (source) packages in the list and remove the subpackages. Thanks a lot for your help, Marco. Corinna
attached 2 files. The first is basically what should be the new cygwin-pkg-maint that cover all the active package in both 32bit and 64 bit. All packages are reported as lower case. The second one is the list of packages reported in the current file that do not exist as package or source package. Except very few macro families (xorg, unison) all the rest seems tome bumped dll's or old removed packages; I already removed some obvious typos, but I could have missed others.
Questions: - Do we want to maintain the macro families in the files ? - What to do with the other entries : leave as OBSOLETE record (at package level) or drop them completely ? Regards Marco
Attachment:
pkg-maint-active.txt.bz2
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
pkg-maint-obsolete.txt.bz2
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |