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]

Re: Please try new setup exe's

On Jul 16 11:37, Jon TURNEY wrote:
> On 16/07/2013 03:08, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 09:49:12PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
> >> On 7/15/2013 8:20 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 01:05:53PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>>> I'd appreciate it if people could try the two new setup.exe's
> >>>> installed at
> >>>>
> >>>> for 32-bit
> >>>> for 64-bit
> >>>>
> >>>> The setup.ini's for both are updated using a similar schedule to the
> >>>> "official and soon to be deleted" version which uses
> >>>> /var/ftp/pub/cygwin/release.  The -x86* versions of these programs
> >>>> use the release directories from the arch specific locations.
> >>>>
> >>>> The setup.ini's used by these two new programs are not
> >>>> backwards-compatible with old setup.exe.
> >>>
> >>> Just to be clear, these new setup.exe's should not do anything untoward
> >>> to your existing installation.  They should *just work*.
> >>
> >> setup-x86_64.exe behaves differently from setup64.exe with respect to 
> >> source-only packages.  (I don't know which one is "right".)  This is 
> >> showing up for me because the 64-bit versions of gcc and readline are 
> >> source-only packages that are (incorrectly?) required by other packages. 
> >>  setup64.exe seems to ignore these requirements, whereas 
> >> setup-x86_64.exe wants to install the packages but then reports 
> >> "Incomplete download".
> > 
> > Thanks for trying this.  I doubt that is anything that I introduced.
> > 
> > Do you see the same behavior from setup-x86.exe?
> In x86, readline is the devel package, and so has source and binary tar files.
> In x86_64, the packaging is different and a libreadline-devel package has been
> added, so readline is now source only, but has things which depend on it (e.g.
> gawk, gdb, python) becuase they haven't been updated for this change.
> It seems setup reports trying to install a package for which it knows no
> versions with the helpful message "Incomplete download" :-)

That's not nice of setup, but the dependencies to gcc are incorrect
anyway.  I figured that the culprit are three of my packages, namely
gperf, openssh and psmisc, which all three depend on gcc for no apparent
reason.  I vaguely recall a discussion with Yaakov, months ago, that the
gcc dependencies were created by a tiny bug in cygport.

I fixed these wrong dependencies on sourceware.

Just checking if the latest cygport still produces these spurious gcc


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

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