> >So cygwin should depend on bash and shellutils. > > How do you figure that? Rob's right, it means setup.exe (for cygwin.bat and /etc/profile) should "depend" on the bash and shellutils packages. Hm. Evil thought--why not make the setup.exe auto-updating feature grab the file as /latest/setup/setup.tar.bz2, make the cinstall src available through setup.exe. In other words, make setup.exe a package. May be more complicated than it's worth, I haven't seen the auto-updating code.
> If newlib-man is in "Base" then that's a bug in > setup.exe. It is > supposed to be in "Doc" according to setup.ini. No no. I agree that both man and newlib-man are "Doc", but 1. man is in only "Base" (where it's practically useless without groff and less) 2. newlib-man deals with "Devel" so maybe it should be listed there, too, or "Doc" as a seperate category should be postponed until more comprehensive documentation packages are available > It does raise the whole X11 issue, though. Well, yes and no. The native-win version of rxvt is a unique animal. I'd like it in "Base" since I use it by default, but barring a change in the setup.exe code that creates the Desktop/Start Menu links(desktop.cc I believe) this isn't going to happen. But in either case "Util" seems more appropriate than "Shells" > We cannot completely avoid [EMAIL PROTECTED] > questions Well, someone could port procmail and send everyhing to /dev/null. But it's a true point. > > What is the consensus on the meaning of the 'base' > category? > > > > Is it a) the _absolute minimum_ to run shell > scripts and invoke > > programs, or b) is it the core install for a > comfortable environment? Well, it might also be a choice to have "Base" left as it is and make a "Core" (instead of "Util"?) for what people probably expect (man, sed, which, etc). __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com