>>Try as I might I cannot get the specified list of packages to be
>>the only ones highlighted :(
>
>Why would you?

Errr, cos I was following the instruction on the wiki page?

>The other packages might be needed.

Or they might just eat up bandwidth, time and hard drive space.

>This is exactly why so many users have had problems with the devkit,
>because it doesn't include those "extra" packages.

No, it's not. The files included in The DevKit are in no way related
to the cygwin installation system, other than by coincidence.

>>>While you're at it, consider adding gdb to the package.
>>
>>Yes. I have considered it many times. I just wonder how many
>>DevKit users would want, need or possibly even know how to use it.
>
>Some of them do, and then we can't help them. Here we go again, you
>give them a stripped-down version that they can't use fully. What is
>a "developer" kit without a debugger?

I shall take it upon myself to presume that you do not understand the
rather crass tone of the phrase "here we go again", for it seems out
of character for you.

The whole POINT of The DevKit IS that it is stripped down to the bare minimum.
It was put together at the request of Rockbox Devs ...Not, I might
add, originally by me - my original involvement was merely a Win98
Beta Tester - but when DevZer0 left the scene, I kept up his good work.

>>Time.
>>click ...10MB download ...click ...setup.bat ...click ...bash prompt
>>Drive Space.
>>70MB (after install*) -vs- 300+MB**
>
>Which would you choose?

Me personally? You know which I choose ...The DevKit!

More importantly: Which one are the users choosing? ...The DevKit is
so popular that its efficient working is (apparently) an endless
stream of daily input to the IRC channel and forums.

>Linus

BlueChip
Received on Sat Feb 11 13:16:15 2006