Re: setup.ini dependency graph?

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 09:32:10AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>On 10/30/2013 9:51 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>> On 30/10/2013 8:48 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>> Yeah; even for my stripped-down version, I need to pre-process the
>>> setup.ini and remove all mentions of cygwin, libstdc++6, libgcc1, etc.
>>> The ncurses DLLs are also a huge nexus.  (It's probably easier to
>>> exclude those nodes by mucking with the perl, but...)
>> Quick question: do you have 1+ known-big-unwanted packages and need to
>> know who's pulling them in, or are you hoping to take some cut of the
>> graph that gets as many desirable packages as possible given the space
>> constraints? The graph-building script here is good for the latter, but
>> I had the impression you were doing the former; if so, my script might
>> get you to an answer faster by avoiding information overload.
>
>A combination of the two, actually.  I've used both David's script and 
>yours in concert.  In addition, I've modified David's script to color 
>the nodes based on origination, and to exclude or collapse 'Base' and/or 
>'required-by-Base' packages.
>
>I've got a few cleanups, and then I'll share the result.  It's already 
>helped me generate a few re-packaging requests I plan to post over on 
>cygwin-apps...

Is this packagable?  It sounds pretty interesting.

Would it be crazy to generate this and make it available on the cygwin
web site?  Or would the dependency graph generation overload
sourceware.org?

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