[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Setup and Apt issues

Hi folks.

[Rationale: I've established a local mirror at work which is used by
some colleagues as a convenient way to install cygwin on the NT boxen we
have to use. Only problem is I didn't found out how to setup a *real*
mirror, so I employed mkcygwget on a Linux machine with Samba, told
everyone to connect to the guest share 'cygwin', run setup and choose
'Install from Local Directory'.
Still to much fuzz compared to my Debian boxes at home, where things
like updating the local package databases are done automatically.
Whining co-workers constantly come into my office, "it aint work" and
when I ask them when they updated Cygwin for the last time they tell me
they did it in July 2002. :-( ]

Am Mon, 2003-06-09 um 11.47 schrieb Robert Collins:
> On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 19:23, Holger Spielmann wrote:
> > Next would be to have the packages provided by cygwin itself inside the
> > apt repository so you could switch from using setup.exe, which has IMHO
> > some shortcomings (at least, it's GUI-based ;-), to apt without having
> > to install packages to /usr/local.
> Just in case you don't know:
> setup has command line options to control nearly all the behaviour, and
> it's easy to add more.

I know there is something, but you have to admit it's currently not
documented very well.
OK, I investigated in the archives of the cygwin mailing list, checked
out the setup sources from CVS to find out about the command line
options. Now I know how to accomplish some things.

> Like apt, it supports multiple mirrors.
> It can read a debian Sources and Packages file.

Beside the current lack of documentation, that's only half the way I
want to go: My aim is a script which can be run by cron or the scheduler
or dropped into the autostart folder, update the local package database
in background from a configurable source at boot-time or daily and
optionally tell the user what should be updated.

So my wishlist for a cygwin setup tool would be:
- more modularity
- configuration done via files, not command-line parameters
- setup tools should be in a package, not outside
- GUI shall only be an option, no requirement

And I already find that in apt, dpkg and related tools.
Not that I don't like setup, it's a great tool, really.

Best regards,
Holger Spielmann

Reply to: