Ok, I understand, and, yes, it's also about setup.exe. That would be true if the package was marked as 'a test package', aka those marked '[test]' in setup.ini, but what if they were not? From my example bash 4.2 is not marked as [test] (I've changed 'installed.db' file accordingly), yet setup(64) downgrades it to 4.1
Why not use two conditions instead of just one? Say, 'if package is more recent, and not marked as [test], then do not downgrade (keep)'. _______________________________ From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh at cygwin dot com> To: cygwin at cygwin dot com Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:01:37 -0400 Subject: Re: [Feature request] Setup64.exe should respect more recent packages' version References: <CAHYyVz6Euyswoakzc=-1cYN3K7OdbSTdtnUA2N_b0VntVKXk7Q at mail dot gmail dot com> Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com ________________________________ On 6/17/2013 2:54 PM, Vasiliy wrote: Could it be possible for Setup64.exe that it would not offer downgrading packages by default if their more recent counterparts are installed? Example of an undesirable behavior: installed is bash 4.2, but 4.1 version is wrongly suggested, etc. Setup suggests downgrading only when you've install a test package. There's nothing distinctive about 'setup.64.exe' vs 'setup.exe' in this regard. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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
