Hi Henri, On Jan 28 13:24, Houder wrote: > Hi Corinna, > > Perhaps I was out of line with my post (which advertised your test > version of setup.exe)
No worries. Getting more testing is good. As long as people are aware that "test" version means *test* version and that in case of a bug, it might happily eat your PC, and rightfully so ;) > https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2015-01/msg00369.html > > Perhaps I should have written, that I ALSO never 'downgrade' ... > (consequently I did not test that "feature"). > > And now it turns out that downgrading does not work (as you made > clear); it even removes the package if one attempts to downgrade a > package ... > > You are correct, downgrading using the test version of setup.exe, > removes the package. I uploaded a supposedly (hopefully) fixed version to https://cygwin.com/setup-test-x86.exe https://cygwin.com/setup-test-x86_64.exe It works for me(TM). It also fixes another subtil problem I encountered while testing. When checking and unchecking the Bin/Src boxes, if both boxes were deselected, the package got uninstalled without showing up in the "Pending" view. I worked around that by setting the package state explicitely to "Uninstall" if both boxes got deselected. > [...] > (it almost makes me wish for an "economy-class" version of setup.exe > ... a slimmed down version, that is also NOT a brain twister for the > developers) Oh, how I wish *that* were true... Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
pgpT47ECw7j6k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
