On Dec 8 14:55, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 07:16:51PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Dec 8 13:00, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> I think that when 1.7 is adopted > >> > >> release-2 -> release > >> release -> release-deprecated > >> > >> and we make setup.exe changes to accommodate that. > > > >I was just going to agree but ... does that work? The idea is that > >people still using an old setup will get the old release. Since > >"release" is fixed in old versions of setup, it might be more feasible > >to stick to release-2 or to use something along the lines you suggested > >at one point, like, say, "release-nt". > > Ah, right. I wasn't thinking that people who had the old release might not > want to update. Too bad we didn't have a mechanism in setup.exe to provide > a warning to people before updating. > > So, release-2 becomes a first-class directory, setup.exe -> > setup-deprecated.exe > setup-1.7 -> setup.exe?
Sounds good to me. Apropos package rebuild. The only package which really bugs me is the orphaned cygwin-doc package. I guess I will havea try in rebuilding a new one, even though I still don't get how to create the pdf docs. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
