On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 12:39:51AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: > Robert Collins wrote > > >>You've stated several times that you're looking only at "baby > >>steps" -- but > >>I think baby steps are counterproductive here. Imagine a > >> > > > > I agree in principle. The issues I percieve is that > > 1) setup.exe isn't ready for more than bare bones changes - regardless > > of rpm or dpkg inspiration.
Guys, I would prefer to keep it simple. And since we already have seen implementations of rpm for Cygwin (regardless of the "replace DLL/EXE while running" problem) I would propose the rpm way which would easily fit in our current packaging scheme. - setup.exe creates the /usr/src/cygwin directory and it's subdirs BUILD, RPMS, SOURCES, SPECS and SRPMS. - Our current tar.bz2/tar.gz source packages are copied on demand into /usr/src/cygwin/SOURCES. They will not extracted in future. - New packages or new versions of existing packages could choose to repack as genuine .tar.[bg]z* file (using the already existing naming convention plus a patch file which is called package-<version>-<cygwin subversion>.dif - If a package maintainer likes, he can choose to add a package-<version>-<cygwin subversion>.spec file to the directory which then will be copied to /usr/src/cygwin/SPECS. That's all. And that's everything which should be done by setup, IMO. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.