Web lists-archives.com

RE: setup -g ???




Lee wrote:
> On 3/18/18, David Allsopp   wrote:
> > Lee wrote:
> >> On 3/14/18, David Allsopp wrote:
> >> > [reformatted for top-posting]
> >> >
> >> > Lee wrote:
> >> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> >> > From: Jon Turney
> >> >> > Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:26:27 +0000
> >> >> > Subject: Re: Problem running the latest python2-2.7.14-1 under
> >> >> > AppVeyor
> >> >> > To: The Cygwin Mailing List <cygwin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 03/11/2017 14:45, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> >> >> > > Our build has started on AppVeyor, a continuous integration
> >> >> > > provider, started failing since a couple of days as a makefile
> >> >> > > command running a Python script started failing with exit code
> >> >> > > 127 without any more information. This is a strange situation
> >> >> > > as I can't reproduce the problem locally, but something
> >> >> > > definitely seems to be wrong with this package on the AppVeyor
> >> >> > > machine as Python just doesn't seem to be executable, e.g. the
> >> >> > > output of these commands in our batch file
> >> >> > driving the build:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Perhaps you need to provide the -g (--upgrade-also) flag to
> >> >> > cygwin's setup.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Due to setup terribleness, without this flag, it will install
> >> >> > the requested packages, and any missing dependencies of them,
> >> >> > but not upgrade any of the dependencies which are already
> >> >> > installed to the current (and perhaps needed) version...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > See also [1].
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [1] https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2017-03/msg00365.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Should we still be using the -g (--upgrade-also) flag on setup?
> >> >
> >> > I believe so (or at least hope so).
> >>
> >> So if I run setup and it says there are no pending updates it might
> >> be lying to me?
> >>
> >> I need to run setup -g and only then if there are no pending updates
> >> do I know that my cygwin installation is up to date?
> >
> > No - the original question here was about running setup with a command
> > line and the --packages argument. If you run setup interactively (with
> > no arguments), you should be told if any packages need upgrading, just
> > as before, without needing -g.
> 
> When I saw the msg about
> > Perhaps you need to provide the -g (--upgrade-also) flag
> I tried running setup & got a short list of updates.  Applied the
> updates and ran setup again.. and had no pending updates listed as
> expected.  Then I ran setup -g and a few libXXX things were listed as
> pending :(
> 
> Maybe I got lucky & the lib<whatevers> showed up at the mirror I was
> using just after running setup the second time??  dunno, but
> unless/until I can duplicate setup not showing any pending updates &
> setup -g saying there are pending updates, maybe we should just write it
> off as a one time occurrence.

It's possible that it was simply a mirror update - there are two ways to tell, if you see it again (or if you can remember what the actual packages were and the date you did it). One is to look in the history of this mailing list and see if there was an announce of a package update on or around the time you did the update. The other is to browse a mirror directly (e.g. https://mirrorservice.org/sites/sourceware.org/pub/cygwin/) and look at the timestamps of the files for the new package which appeared.

The third way, if it really worries you, is to use a private mirror (either via rsync or using Cygwin setup's "Download" option - though over the years I've found the latter remarkably unreliable) which allows completely repeatable installations.

HTH,


David