> ---------- > From: Ronald Landheer-Cieslak[SM] > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 6. avgust 2003 18:15 > To: David Balazic > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Less fails with link error > > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 05:45:23PM +0200, David Balazic wrote: > > I just selected the latest version of less ( by clicking on its name to > > cycle versions ). > > There was no warning that it is incompatible with the cygwin version. > Cycling through the versions is a dangerous thing these days - you should > only > Is there any other way to get from some version selection back to "Skip" ? If it is dangerous, then it should be disabled or accompanied with a warning.
> do it if you know what you're doing. The version Setup proposes is the one > you > should normally use, because it's the one the maintainer wants you to use. > The > maintainer is usually right about what you should use.. There was no note saying that the maintainer prefers one version over another. They all were offered to choose from. > > > You used Setup to install, didn't you? > > yes. > > > Use cygcheck to get the version of less, then :) > > I llearned something new. > > rpm would catch the incompatibility though :-) > versioned dependencies in Setup are a work-in-progress *and* require the > maintainers to put them in the setup.hint files. Neither is magic. > > IIRC, rpm doesn't use any wizzardry either: versioned dependencies are the > maintainer's job. > > As for the state of progress on versioned dependencies in Setup (before > you > ask) IIRC it needs testing more than anything else - but one of the Setup > people will surely correct me if I'm wrong.. > Well I guess I just tested it :-) > rlc > > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
