[Patch] Setup: Store view setting. (was: Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages)
Op Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:15:51 -0500 (EST) schreef Igor Pechtchanski
in Pine.GSO.4.63.0511130213590.24379atslinky.cs.nyu.edu:
: On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Bas van Gompel wrote:
[Patch to let setup store the latest view of the chooser window]
: Can we please get this re-sent with a non-inline patch and with a
: different subject line? This thread is already horribly overloaded.
[...]
Sure.
ChangeLog-entry: (Please fix the at.)
2005-11-13 Bas van Gompel patch-cygsup.buzzatbavag.tmfweb.nl
* choose.h (class ViewSetting): Declare.
* choose.cc (ViewSetting::load, ViewSetting::save): Implement.
(ChooserPage::createListview): Use ViewSetting.
(ChooserPage::OnNext): Store ViewSetting.
L9r,
Buzz.
--
) | | ---/ ---/ Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not
-- | | // really is | and false bits entirely.| mail for
) | | //a 72 by 4 +---+ any1 but
-- \--| /--- /--- .sigfile. | |perl -pe s.u(z)\1.as.| me. 4^re
Index: setup/choose.cc
===
RCS file: /cvs/cygwin-apps/setup/choose.cc,v
retrieving revision 2.142
diff -u -p -r2.142 choose.cc
--- setup/choose.cc 9 Sep 2005 19:52:51 - 2.142
+++ setup/choose.cc 13 Nov 2005 16:22:32 -
@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ static const char *cvsid =
#include ControlAdjuster.h
#include prereq.h
+#include UserSettings.h
+
using namespace std;
extern ThreeBarProgressPage Progress;
@@ -78,6 +80,39 @@ static ControlAdjuster::ControlInfo Choo
{0, CP_LEFT, CP_TOP}
};
+static ViewSetting ChosenView;
+
+void
+ViewSetting::load()
+{
+ value = PickView::views::Category;
+ io_stream *f = UserSettings::Instance().settingFileForLoad(last-view);
+ if (f)
+{
+ char view[1000];
+ if (f-gets (view, 1000))
+ {
+ while (String (value.caption()) != String (view)
+++value != PickView::views::Category) ; // Do nothing
+ }
+ delete f;
+}
+ log (LOG_PLAIN) Loaded last view setting: value.caption() endLog;
+}
+
+void
+ViewSetting::save()
+{
+ io_stream *f = UserSettings::Instance().settingFileForSave(last-view);
+ if (f)
+{
+ f-write ((String(value.caption()) + \n).c_str(),
+strlen (value.caption()) + 1);
+ delete f;
+ log (LOG_PLAIN) Saved last view setting: value.caption()
endLog;
+}
+}
+
ChooserPage::ChooserPage ()
{
sizeProcessor.AddControlInfo (ChooserControlsInfo);
@@ -92,11 +127,11 @@ ChooserPage::createListview ()
if (!chooser-Create(this, WS_CHILD | WS_HSCROLL | WS_VSCROLL |
WS_VISIBLE,r))
// TODO throw exception
exit (11);
- chooser-init(PickView::views::Category);
+ chooser-init(ChosenView.value);
chooser-Show(SW_SHOW);
chooser-defaultTrust (TRUST_CURR);
- chooser-setViewMode (PickView::views::Category);
+ chooser-setViewMode (ChosenView.value);
if (!SetDlgItemText (GetHWND (), IDC_CHOOSE_VIEWCAPTION,
chooser-mode_caption ()))
log (LOG_BABBLE) Failed to set View button caption %ld
GetLastError () endLog;
@@ -193,6 +228,10 @@ ChooserPage::OnNext ()
logResults();
#endif
+ ChosenView.value = PickView::views::Category;
+ while (String (ChosenView.value.caption()) != String
(chooser-mode_caption())
+++ChosenView.value != PickView::views::Category) ; // Do nothing
+
PrereqChecker p;
if (p.isMet ())
{
Index: setup/choose.h
===
RCS file: /cvs/cygwin-apps/setup/choose.h,v
retrieving revision 2.36
diff -u -p -r2.36 choose.h
--- setup/choose.h 21 May 2005 23:04:02 - 2.36
+++ setup/choose.h 13 Nov 2005 16:22:33 -
@@ -55,4 +55,13 @@ public:
PickView *chooser;
};
+#include UserSetting.h
+class ViewSetting : public UserSetting
+{
+ public:
+PickView::views value;
+virtual void load();
+virtual void save();
+};
+
#endif /* SETUP_CHOOSE_H */
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
Op Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:51:45 +0100 (MET) schreef Bas van Gompel
in n2m-g.dku81h.3vvae1b.at@buzzy-box.bavag:
: Op Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:21:28 +0100 schreef Corinna Vinschen
: in 20051109162128.GA29765atcalimero.vinschen.de:
: [...]
:: Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest
:: view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in
:: almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category
:: view. Can storing the last view be added easily?
:
: It doesn't look hard... I've partly done it. If no-one starts jumping
: up and down saying ``Let me!'', I'll finish it.
Its done.
ChangeLog-entry: (Please fix the at.)
2005-11-13 Bas van Gompel patch-cygsup.buzzatbavag.tmfweb.nl
* choose.h (class ViewSetting): Declare.
* choose.cc (ViewSetting::load, ViewSetting::save): Implement.
(ChooserPage::createListview): Use ViewSetting.
(ChooserPage::OnNext): Store ViewSetting.
--- setup/choose.h 21 May 2005 23:04:02 - 2.36
+++ setup/choose.h 12 Nov 2005 19:36:21 -
@@ -55,4 +55,13 @@ public:
PickView *chooser;
};
+#include UserSetting.h
+class ViewSetting : public UserSetting
+{
+ public:
+PickView::views value;
+virtual void load();
+virtual void save();
+};
+
#endif /* SETUP_CHOOSE_H */
--- setup/choose.cc 9 Sep 2005 19:52:51 - 2.142
+++ setup/choose.cc 12 Nov 2005 19:36:21 -
@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ static const char *cvsid =
#include ControlAdjuster.h
#include prereq.h
+#include UserSettings.h
+
using namespace std;
extern ThreeBarProgressPage Progress;
@@ -78,6 +80,39 @@ static ControlAdjuster::ControlInfo Choo
{0, CP_LEFT, CP_TOP}
};
+static ViewSetting ChosenView;
+
+void
+ViewSetting::load()
+{
+ value = PickView::views::Category;
+ io_stream *f = UserSettings::Instance().settingFileForLoad(last-view);
+ if (f)
+{
+ char view[1000];
+ if (f-gets (view, 1000))
+ {
+ while (String (value.caption()) != String (view)
+++value != PickView::views::Category) ; // Do nothing
+ }
+ delete f;
+}
+ log (LOG_PLAIN) Loaded last view setting: value.caption() endLog;
+}
+
+void
+ViewSetting::save()
+{
+ io_stream *f = UserSettings::Instance().settingFileForSave(last-view);
+ if (f)
+{
+ f-write ((String(value.caption()) + \n).c_str(),
+strlen (value.caption()) + 1);
+ delete f;
+ log (LOG_PLAIN) Saved last view setting: value.caption()
endLog;
+}
+}
+
ChooserPage::ChooserPage ()
{
sizeProcessor.AddControlInfo (ChooserControlsInfo);
@@ -92,11 +127,11 @@ ChooserPage::createListview ()
if (!chooser-Create(this, WS_CHILD | WS_HSCROLL | WS_VSCROLL |
WS_VISIBLE,r))
// TODO throw exception
exit (11);
- chooser-init(PickView::views::Category);
+ chooser-init(ChosenView.value);
chooser-Show(SW_SHOW);
chooser-defaultTrust (TRUST_CURR);
- chooser-setViewMode (PickView::views::Category);
+ chooser-setViewMode (ChosenView.value);
if (!SetDlgItemText (GetHWND (), IDC_CHOOSE_VIEWCAPTION,
chooser-mode_caption ()))
log (LOG_BABBLE) Failed to set View button caption %ld
GetLastError () endLog;
@@ -193,6 +228,10 @@ ChooserPage::OnNext ()
logResults();
#endif
+ ChosenView.value = PickView::views::Category;
+ while (String (ChosenView.value.caption()) != String
(chooser-mode_caption())
+++ChosenView.value != PickView::views::Category) ; // Do nothing
+
PrereqChecker p;
if (p.isMet ())
{
L8r,
Buzz.
--
) | | ---/ ---/ Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not
-- | | // really is | and false bits entirely.| mail for
) | | //a 72 by 4 +---+ any1 but
-- \--| /--- /--- .sigfile. | |perl -pe s.u(z)\1.as.| me. 4^re
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Bas van Gompel wrote: Op Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:51:45 +0100 (MET) schreef Bas van Gompel in n2m-g.dku81h.3vvae1b.at@buzzy-box.bavag: : Op Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:21:28 +0100 schreef Corinna Vinschen : in 20051109162128.GA29765atcalimero.vinschen.de: : [...] :: Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest :: view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in :: almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category :: view. Can storing the last view be added easily? : : It doesn't look hard... I've partly done it. If no-one starts jumping : up and down saying ``Let me!'', I'll finish it. Its done. ChangeLog-entry: (Please fix the at.) 2005-11-13 Bas van Gompel patch-cygsup.buzzatbavag.tmfweb.nl * choose.h (class ViewSetting): Declare. * choose.cc (ViewSetting::load, ViewSetting::save): Implement. (ChooserPage::createListview): Use ViewSetting. (ChooserPage::OnNext): Store ViewSetting. [snip] Can we please get this re-sent with a non-inline patch and with a different subject line? This thread is already horribly overloaded. Igor P.S. I'll try to sum up the real subject matter next week if I have the time... -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
Re: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
(Sorry for the late post, I was trying to get the news server to take it. guess that isn't an option for this list?) This would be particularly nice if setup.exe were modified so that on an initial installation, it showed a profile selection page first, instead of the package selection page. The profile selection page would let the user choose one or more profiles to install; the packages selected would be a union of the dependencies from the profiles. There could be a check box for advanced package selection that the user could select if they wanted to go to the regular package selection page. Good idea. In addition: user picks profiles and advanced, the package selection page would be setup with the packages that the picked profiles use. Now for the fun: If they hit advanced alter the current package selections, hit Back the package list should reflect what profiles are still fully supported. For instance: pick WebServer + advanced, next, unselect php, back - WebServer should no longer be selected. more fun: WebServer is 1/2 selected - gray or something. Better fun: 15 of 16 packages selected. Roll the Profile and Advanced into one: Profiles items in the package selection tree, and under it are all the related packages. The same package can be in more than one Profile, and the bottom of the list would be the All profile. Re-running setup.exe (for updates, as opposed to an installation) would skip the profile selection page and go straight to the package selection page. Not so good. I think it should always start with the profile page, defaulting to the currently selected packages, just like if they had hit Back. ^Carl
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
Igor wrote: SNIP How about just .INSTALLATION-PROFILES? Why have more than one category here? Ok ...or just .PROFILES then? (KISS?) In combination w explaining words somewhere around the chooser: Use (one) choice(s) from the .PROFILE group to slant your cygwin installation against a specific intended use. (too many words?). AFTERTHOUGHT: The commandline automatic install possibilities need to be considered before adding GUI-stuff. Adding GUI-stuff is easy. Decoupling installation from GUI to allow command line automatic install is hard. Igor Ough... :-7 Even going for; Not allowing profile++ selection for command line startup? /STOP HERE/ if you're not open to new ideas. I have to admit, I have yet to take a first read on the source. But anyway, this might give other ppl ideas: Definition: GCAS := all the _GUI _Choosers/selections _And _Screens 1) Would it be hard to make a command line startup bypass GCAS and head directly for installation? In this: Requiring choices to have been made previously. 2) Make it possible to run GCAS and the stop, with no download/install sequence at all; saving selections made to setup file(s) - which can be reused. Intention: to allow a run of 1) afterwards. 3) make files created at 2) be checksummed and say The settings file(s) has a bad checksum and might have been tampered with manually; BE WARNED! Remember \WJM\ evil laugh if the checksum doesn't match. And yes, SHTDI - but would it be a tedious task? /H --
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
Igor wrote: On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote: Igor wrote: SNIP How about just .INSTALLATION-PROFILES? Why have more than one category here? Ok ...or just .PROFILES then? (KISS?) http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2005-11/msg00064.html. Yes :-] , but with my addition, which is essential IMO: In combination w explaining words somewhere around the chooser: Use (one) choice(s) from the .PROFILE group to slant your cygwin installation against a specific intended use. (too many words?). We don't have category descriptions, unfortunately... Therefore this should go above the chooser, if possible. (Did somebody already suggest this too? *SNARL* ;-) SNIP Definition: GCAS := all the _GUI _Choosers/selections _And _Screens 1) Would it be hard to make a command line startup bypass GCAS and head directly for installation? In this: Requiring choices to have been made previously. Yes. The point is that GCAS is going to be involved in the package selection process, one way or another. Which AFAIU makes up 2) below... Even if you try to not materialize the GUI screens (which is a possibility), the code that deals with the package installation list is part of the GUI code. Yes? How is this a problem? I was after creating the installation list with the GUI as described here: 2) Make it possible to run GCAS and the stop, with no ^^^- then download/install sequence at all; saving selections made to setup file(s) - which can be reused. Intention: to allow a run of 1) afterwards. This is essentially 1). Eh? I find this confusing! ;-) Should I understand that the code is horribly intertwined from this? The fact that the selections come from a file saved by the chooser as opposed to a file created by hand is reasonably irrelevant. 3) make files created at 2) be checksummed and say The settings file(s) has a bad checksum and might have been tampered with manually; BE WARNED! Remember \WJM\ evil laugh if the checksum doesn't match. This is a completely separate issue. Is it? e.g. My installation list doesn't work! Reply: Use GCAS, or else... ! ;-) And yes, SHTDI - but would it be a tedious task? Yes, most definitely. I suspected that. It won't be very hard, but it will be tedious. And SHTDI does sum it up nicely. Enjoy. :-) Igor PLAU! (Peace, Love And Understanding) /H --
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, November 9, 2005 9:31 am, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] ? J.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I like the idea. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, but otherwise I like the ALL-CAPS idea (in fact, the packages also ought to be ALL-CAPS, maybe with dashes in the category and the underscores in packages, or vice versa). Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 9 09:35, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, What about a leading dot? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I also think it's time for this, and propose that whatever naming scheme is agreed upon, setup.exe should have a chooser view that only shows these (that view should probably be the default one, too).
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Nov 9 07:56, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I also think it's time for this, and propose that whatever naming scheme is agreed upon, setup.exe should have a chooser view that only shows these (that view should probably be the default one, too). I would be careful with this. The package selection groups are only really useful on the first install. Later calls to setup for updating or installing more packages are usually better off with the current view. Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category view. Can storing the last view be added easily? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Nov 9 09:35, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote: The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something special. I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's not only that this meta category should come first, it should also be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO. Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES USER-PROFILES We'll need to put a space or an '@' at the beginning to ensure sort order, What about a leading dot? Yep, looking at the lexer, a leading dot should work (without quoting). And I like it better than an '@' or a space... Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
on Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:11 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Hmm, outlook quotefix is better than nothing, but optimal) SNIP Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES Hmm... default has little to do with packages imho, or? USER-PROFILES USER indicates something personal... :-p John Morison wrote: (manual fix) +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] More wording ideas: SELECTION, CHOICE, PRESET, ORIENTATION predefined package choice ? Cygwin_use-orientation-presets? Cygwin-use-presets ? ... with better wording. AFTERTHOUGHT: The commandline automatic install possibilities need to be considered before adding GUI-stuff. -- /H
RE: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote: on Wednesday, November 09, 2005 11:11 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category. DEFAULT-PROFILES Hmm... default has little to do with packages imho, or? USER-PROFILES USER indicates something personal... :-p John Morison wrote: (manual fix) +1 on the caps... How about FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES] PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES] More wording ideas: SELECTION, CHOICE, PRESET, ORIENTATION predefined package choice ? Cygwin_use-orientation-presets? Cygwin-use-presets ? ... with better wording. How about just .INSTALLATION-PROFILES? Why have more than one category here? AFTERTHOUGHT: The commandline automatic install possibilities need to be considered before adding GUI-stuff. Adding GUI-stuff is easy. Decoupling installation from GUI to allow command line automatic install is hard. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
Op Wed, 9 Nov 2005 17:21:28 +0100 schreef Corinna Vinschen in 20051109162128.GA29765atcalimero.vinschen.de: [...] : Which reminds me... isn't there a way that setup could store the latest : view of the chooser window the user has selected? For instance, in : almost all cases I'd like to see the Partial view, not the Category : view. Can storing the last view be added easily? It doesn't look hard... I've partly done it. If no-one starts jumping up and down saying ``Let me!'', I'll finish it. L8r, Buzz. [What about my other setup-patches? (I tested them. They WFM.)] -- ) | | ---/ ---/ Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not -- | | // really is | and false bits entirely.| mail for ) | | //a 72 by 4 +---+ any1 but -- \--| /--- /--- .sigfile. | |perl -pe s.u(z)\1.as.| me. 4^re
RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
As the latest installment in the recent series of major D'oh!s, I realized that the installation profiles I previously proposed for setup could be initially implemented as special packages with the right dependences. This still doesn't absolve us from adding some more sophisticated support for these in setup (e.g., communicating the user prerefence about creating desktop icons to them), but it's a start, and it'll cut down on the I installed Cygwin, so how come gcc doesn't work (and the much more annoying just install everything, it's only 2 gigs answers to those). IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA XWindows.tar.bz2 Description: Binary data @ XWindows category: @Profiles requires: cygwin xorg-x11-base X-start-menu-icons sdesc:Includes packages needed to set up an X server ldesc:Profile for SSH server deployment. The packages included in this profile allow setting up and starting an X server on your machine. In the future this could include a postinstall script for creating a desktop icon, etc. WebServer.tar.bz2 Description: Binary data @ WebServer category: @Profiles requires: cygwin apache2 sdesc:Includes packages needed to set up a web server ldesc:Profile for SSH server deployment. The packages included in this profile allow setting up and starting a web server on your machine. SSHServer.tar.bz2 Description: Binary data @ SSHServer category: @Profiles requires: cygwin openssh sdesc:Includes packages needed to set up an SSH server ldesc:Profile for SSH server deployment. The packages included in this profile allow setting up and starting an SSH server on your machine. LatexDevelopment.tar.bz2 Description: Binary data @ LatexDevelopment category: @Profiles requires: cygwin tetex tetex-extra ghostscript ImageMagick sdesc:Includes packages needed to build documents with LaTeX ldesc:Profile for LaTeX document development. The packages included in this profile allow building documents using TeX/LaTeX, limited image conversion, as well as PostScript to PDF conversion. GCCDevelopment.tar.bz2 Description: Binary data @ GCCDevelopment category: @Profiles requires: cygwin bash gcc make autoconf automake gdb upx sdesc:Includes packages needed to build programs with GCC ldesc:Profile for GCC development. The packages included in this profile allow compiling programs using GCC, running 'make', debugging programs using 'gdb', and running autotools.
RE: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Wow. This sounds neat. This would be particularly nice if setup.exe were modified so that on an initial installation, it showed a profile selection page first, instead of the package selection page. The profile selection page would let the user choose one or more profiles to install; the packages selected would be a union of the dependencies from the profiles. There could be a check box for advanced package selection that the user could select if they wanted to go to the regular package selection page. Re-running setup.exe (for updates, as opposed to an installation) would skip the profile selection page and go straight to the package selection page. -Samrobb
RE: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Robb, Sam wrote: IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Wow. This sounds neat. Yeah, I was surprised myself at how well it works out... This would be particularly nice if setup.exe were modified so that on an initial installation, it showed a profile selection page first, instead of the package selection page. The profile selection page would let the user choose one or more profiles to install; the packages selected would be a union of the dependencies from the profiles. There could be a check box for advanced package selection that the user could select if they wanted to go to the regular package selection page. Re-running setup.exe (for updates, as opposed to an installation) would skip the profile selection page and go straight to the package selection page. This sounds like the kind of support we might eventually have, but for now, placing the @Profiles category first (which ought to happen automatically anyway), and maybe having setup auto-expand it, should be enough. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: As the latest installment in the recent series of major D'oh!s, I realized that the installation profiles I previously proposed for setup could be initially implemented as special packages with the right dependences. This still doesn't absolve us from adding some more sophisticated support for these in setup (e.g., communicating the user prerefence about creating desktop icons to them), but it's a start, and it'll cut down on the I installed Cygwin, so how come gcc doesn't work (and the much more annoying just install everything, it's only 2 gigs answers to those). IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? cgf
Re: RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: As the latest installment in the recent series of major D'oh!s, I realized that the installation profiles I previously proposed for setup could be initially implemented as special packages with the right dependences. This still doesn't absolve us from adding some more sophisticated support for these in setup (e.g., communicating the user prerefence about creating desktop icons to them), but it's a start, and it'll cut down on the I installed Cygwin, so how come gcc doesn't work (and the much more annoying just install everything, it's only 2 gigs answers to those). IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose the name @Profiles to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know if setup will parse this correctly). I've attached a few sample profile packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding setup.hints. We could probably concentrate them all in one directory (thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files). All the .tar.bz2 files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are important. Comments and other suggestions welcome. Note that the attached packages are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have missed something. Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the profiles, though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too much work involved. Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory in release. I'd like to get some consensus on the name Profiles, though. Is that adequately intuitive? That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on. BTW, I just noticed that the setup.hints as sent won't parse, since setup treats @ at the start of a word as a separate character. I'll need to quote the categories (in which case we might as well put a space there and call it @Installation Profiles, or even Installation Profiles, to ensure that they appear before the rest of the categories in the category view). Will upset parse quoted strings properly? Other comments? Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
