Re: New procps release
On Feb 21 21:21, Chris January wrote: I've finally found time to update the procps package. The new version is based off procps 3.2.5 from procps.sourceforge.net. Download links: http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5-1-bin.tar.bz2 http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5-1-src.tar.bz2 The only Cygwin specific change in this version is greater tolerance for different clocks on SMP Windows. Slabinfo is included but does not work (no /proc/slabinfo file exists at present). Pmap requires cygserver. Sysctl is useless. Cygwin 1.5.13 is required (use current CVS for now). If Cygwin 1.5.13 is required, this should be marked as test release. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc.
Re: Setup.exe: Keyboard accessibility
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:07:23 -0700, Steve Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What kind of control is the package selection list? It's a vanilla Windows window, done with old-fashioned explicit windows message handling: WM_PAINT, WM_LBUTTONDOWN, etc. Part of the problem is that it uses a bunch of custom class wrappers around Windows' controls: nothing wrong with that, but it reduces the maintainability and the readability of the code. I'm looking into enabling it to work with the keyboard. I think it will be easier to scroll it that way. One of the problems with the control is that it doesn't take focus, and it reacts differently when you click on different parts of the line. There's embedded checkboxes and what essentially amounts to a multi-state button embedded in every Cygwin package description. Frankly, I think it would be easier to write a new interface. IMHO, the current interface is pretty dire from a usability standpoint, putting aside accessibility for a moment. I hear Qt is now GPL'd for Windows. Perhaps it would be profitable to rewrite the interface in that?
Re: RFC: Apache HTTPD 2.0
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Max Bowsher wrote: Dr. Volker Zell wrote: Max Bowsher writes: I'd like some opinions... Do we really need another top level directory /srv ? First, thanks for looking at the package! To answer your question, Cygwin generally follows the FHS, and FHS 2.3 says /srv is the proper place for such things. SuSE has picked up on this change, too. FHS also defines /sbin for local administrative utility programs, but we use /usr/sbin (since Cygwin makes no distinction between local and remote mounts, and doesn't need something to be present at boot, like Linux does). How about changing /srv to /usr/srv? Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total Lunar eclipse... -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT
Re: Setup.exe: Keyboard accessibility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Well, I hadn't looked at the code and admittedly, I'm not real experienced in windows programming other than Visual Basic. It's just that I am very anxious to get this package selecter into some kind of state where a blind person using a screen reader can viably use Cygwin. Everything else about Cygwin looks great considering my short visit so far but selecting packages is nearly impossible! I can't scroll the thing at all. I can view the first page, click on items and hear the results but scrolling, forget it! I don't know anything about Qt but would be willing to learn and attempt to help with it if a rewrite is considered. Is there any other way to select packages than clicking a mouse on this list? for Simplicity sake, I downloaded the entire collection of 259 packages but managed to scale down what gets installed. What if I just copied in the packages I would be interested in into the local directory and kept the rest offline? Could setup.exe just offer to install the ones it finds? I know, this sounds more complicated than using the control like I said before, I really can't use it effectly in its present state. Thanks for any additional ideas. On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 03:21:14PM +, Barry Kelly wrote: On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:07:23 -0700, Steve Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What kind of control is the package selection list? It's a vanilla Windows window, done with old-fashioned explicit windows message handling: WM_PAINT, WM_LBUTTONDOWN, etc. Part of the problem is that it uses a bunch of custom class wrappers around Windows' controls: nothing wrong with that, but it reduces the maintainability and the readability of the code. I'm looking into enabling it to work with the keyboard. I think it will be easier to scroll it that way. One of the problems with the control is that it doesn't take focus, and it reacts differently when you click on different parts of the line. There's embedded checkboxes and what essentially amounts to a multi-state button embedded in every Cygwin package description. Frankly, I think it would be easier to write a new interface. IMHO, the current interface is pretty dire from a usability standpoint, putting aside accessibility for a moment. I hear Qt is now GPL'd for Windows. Perhaps it would be profitable to rewrite the interface in that? - -- HolmesGrown Solutions The best solutions for the best price! http://ld.net/?holmesgrown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCG1suWSjv55S0LfERArI5AKCaQoHn3ELuirvJtNkurEUQD/iaaQCgtufb ivwg3+ea6j+oEq2zRvv8L3o= =L/nf -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: RFC: Apache HTTPD 2.0
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Max Bowsher wrote: Dr. Volker Zell wrote: Max Bowsher writes: I'd like some opinions... Do we really need another top level directory /srv ? First, thanks for looking at the package! To answer your question, Cygwin generally follows the FHS, and FHS 2.3 says /srv is the proper place for such things. SuSE has picked up on this change, too. FHS also defines /sbin for local administrative utility programs, but we use /usr/sbin (since Cygwin makes no distinction between local and remote mounts, and doesn't need something to be present at boot, like Linux does). How about changing /srv to /usr/srv? Because that would be just bizarre. The FHS defines both /sbin and /usr/sbin, but only defines /srv, not /usr/srv. Also the FHS defines /usr to be read-only during normal operation. Max.
Re: RFC: Apache HTTPD 2.0
Max Bowsher schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: You usually do run both at once, for testing purposes. You do!?! Sure. On port 81. Apache2 usually has weird handler problems, esp. the redhat apache2, which I want to test against. Sometimes redirect and HTTP 1.1 handling is also different. But it's easy for the user to change that in the conf file. Awfully easy to forget, though. -- Reini Urban http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban http://phpwiki.org
