On 1/28/2010 2:15 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 02:02:44PM -0600, Jeremy Bopp wrote: >> On 1/28/2010 12:20 PM, Heath Kehoe wrote: >>> Anyway, for now I'm going to just comment out the call to note() at >>> install.cc:295 so that my users can do installations without having to >>> dismiss that popup 52 times. >> >> Rather than build your own copy of setup.exe while you wait for this >> defect to be fixed, why not use the --packages option for setup.exe to >> select the set of packages you know you need from the command line? If >> your users would have difficulty with that, you could write a simple >> batch file to wrap the setup.exe invocation. > > OTOH, modifying source code and rolling your own copy is precisely why > Free Software project exists in the first place. IMO, this is a great > way of dealing with this kind of situation. I wish more people were > willing to look at source code.
True enough, and hopefully Heath will send along the patches to fix the problem. It just seems in this case that distributing a locally built setup.exe is a bit like hammering a finishing nail with a sledge hammer. Yeah, it works, but it takes far more effort than required to do the job. :-) -Jeremy -- 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
