On 7/25/16, 11:27 PM, Mark Geisert wrote: >Bill Zissimopoulos writes: >> - Rename the package to winfsp-fuse, but have it somehow “satisfy” >> packages that require “fuse” (e.g. SSHFS, FUSEPY). This would allow >> multiple *-fuse packages to exist in the setup database and the user >> chooses which one they want. My understanding based on Marco’s answer is >> that this is not currently supported by Cygwin’s dependency system. > >You could define a package "fuse" with no contents and a dependency on >package "winfsp-fuse". Then later when/if another FUSE implementation >becomes available, "somebody" could replace the "fuse" package with >whatever is required to get alternatives support for the variants.
I will try this although it might take a bit longer than I had hoped. Somehow I had vacation mixed with a family emergency and my free time suddenly became nil. >I'm wondering if "fuse-xxxx" is a better name template than "xxxx-fuse" >in >order to keep the variants near each other in setup.exe's displays. Somehow I find xxxx-fuse better sounding than fuse-xxxx, but your point about keeping them together in setup.exe displays is a very good one. I see no real problem with renaming to fuse-winfsp. Bill
