This is the mail archive of the cygwin 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]

Re: Setup.exe requirements [was RE: Cygintl-3.dll was not found]


On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 05:58:09PM +0200, Tevfik Karag?lle wrote:
>My intention is to develop an alternative to Cygwin Setup.  That means
>it must support all dependencies, setup.ini and package repositories
>around.
>
>I've thought that we can have a monolithic installer which installs a
>basic environment out-of-the-box.  It is very convenient for most of
>the users.

This would never be accepted as a setup.exe replacement.

As a meta issue, I would like it very much if arguments like "this will
benefit most...users" or any other type of generic argument which seems
to attempt to speak decisively about some set of people (e.g.,
"corporate types") could be avoided.  You don't know what most of the
users want so please don't even go there.

>I have already developed an experimental one with Cygwin Base (54
>packages, about 13 MB) as content.  When it is ready for review, it
>will have a 'Cygwin Update' function, which can be used to update
>existing components with dependency check.  If you want to add/remove
>software to/from your Cygwin installation, then there will be a kind of
>'Cygwin Boost' function, where you can pick packages you want to
>install or remove.
>
>Framework I use to develop a monolithic installer is not limited by
>only 'Base'.  It is customizable.  That means you can have different
>startpoints to your cygwin installation.  One variant can only have
>'Cygwin barebone' to meet needs of a specific program (rsync for
>example?), while the other one can be a full-featured OpenSSH server.
>Cygwin Update/Boost function will be common to all those variants of
>monolithic installers.
>
>Any comments ?

As is mentioned elsewhere, having to rebuild an executable with static
content is a way to guarantee out-of-date installation on a customer's
system.  We do not want that.  This is not open to debate.  Please don't
try to push this type of plan.

This is why I sent two different messages on the subject about how the
Base category works.  I guess I just wasn't clear enough.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]