Re: Misleading error message in setup

On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 12:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Here's a small oddity. If you make a mistake in cut and paste when > adding a new download site (easy to accidentally include an invisible > leading or trailing space, for example, in netscape), then instead of > complaining that the URL is w

Re: g++ iostream broken on windows 2000

On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 08:43, Brian Keener wrote: > /usr/develop/src/learning > $ gcc -g -o ./debug/first.exe ./first.cpp g++ ! Oh, and in your output, get rid of the \n, use cout << "foo" << endl; instead. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: Setup installation order?

On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 03:49, Rick Rankin wrote: > Is the cygwin package given any special consideration during the install > process (e.g., last to be uninstalled, first to be (re)installed), or is this > something that's expected to be handled by the dependency list? I've been > perusing the setup

Re: setup versions 2.415, 2.340.2.5, 2.249.2.5 - Reinstall problem?

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 00:42, Hannu E K Nevalainen (garbage mail) wrote: > These problems might have had the main source in setup reinstalling the old > 1.3.22 of cygwin. Again; I don't care, as I said above. > > -- Here we go -- > Prior to these problems I had 1.5.3(?) and "Curr + All @ Install"

Re: setup 2.340.2.5 hangs on parsing ini file

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 02:33, Paul Grinberg wrote: I really need to bump the snapshot to stable. I've been hoping to get the resized chooser in first. Try the snapshot: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/ Rob -- GPG key available at: . signa

Re: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe[Scanned]

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 10:21, Alan Miles wrote: > > I don't believe it should be doing the > > rmdir H:\CygnusSolutions-Cygwin Files\CygwinMachine_Package_Dirs\dest > rmdir H:\CygnusSolutions-Cygwin Files\CygwinMachine_Package_Dirs\build > > commands, and I am not sure if this is a setup.exe iss

Re: Setup bug --- probably already reported and fixed, of course[Scanned]

On Sat, 2003-08-02 at 01:30, Harold L Hunt II wrote: > FYI --- In further testing, archive.progeny.com is the mirror that has > not been updated yet. Selecting only archive.progeny.com gives me the > warning about setup.ini being older than when I last installed Cygwin. > Selecting only mirrors

Re: 'setup.exe' under Win2K Terminal Server in AS mode[Scanned]

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 09:06, msg wrote: > Greetings: > > I've been running 1.3.22 for some months now on a Win2K Server running > Terminal Services in Application Server mode for a variety of > development > projects and am pleased overall; however the entire installation was > done manually for t

Re: Allowing cygwin setup to patch up old versions[Scanned]

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 23:55, chris wrote: > The other major thing is that what I diff is (obviously) the .tar files, > not the .tar.bz2 files, as even a small change to a file usually totally > changes a compressed version of it. The only problem I can see this > causing is that the bzip2 file

RE: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe[Scanned]

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 21:45, Alan Miles wrote: > Rob, > > Thanks for the message. > > However, my "packages" did NOT create these directories - I just wish to > mount them, therefore setup should not be deleting them. For example, I understand that. Which part of my email suggested I did not und

RE: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe[Scanned]

On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 03:24, Alan Miles wrote: > Rob, > > Sorry it has been a looong week ... with quite a number of looong weeks > ahead, > and I misinterpreted your response. > > Anyway, I appreciate your responses. I am going to try a preremove script I > have just checked http://cygwin.com/se

Re: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1[Scanned]

> > 3) Looked at postgres.exe. > > > > $ ls -l /usr/bin/postgre* > > -rwxr-x---+ 1 OwnerUsers 1985024 Aug 1 16:02 > > /usr/bin/postgres.exe > > The permissions of postgres.exe is correct in the tarball: > > $ tar -tvjf postgresql-7.3.4-1.tar.bz2 usr/bin/postgres.exe >

RE: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1[Scanned]

On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 07:03, Seth Rubin wrote: > Dunno. I just ran cygwin's standard setup (i.e. "install now" from > website). Well, If you can find out - for example by trying - then I can analyse the problem further. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 21:35, Jason Tishler wrote: Well, given the brief feedback on my request, I can only really guess. My WAG is that setup needs the cygwin ntsec acl conversion logic ported to it, along with some method to determine whether it should use it or not. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key ava

Re: Bug in lynx setup.hint? (was: Re: cygcrypto-0.9.7.dll)[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 08:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > The colons are just cosmetically, AFAICT. Setup doesn't need them. Setup needs them. Rob -- GPG key available at: . signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 13:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > One of the people here is trying to install Cygwin for the first time > ever on his Win2k PC. We update a mirrored copy of Cygwin nightly, and > install from that on our local network. > > The problem he's having is that when getting to the

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 13:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > One of the people here is trying to install Cygwin for the first time > ever on his Win2k PC. We update a mirrored copy of Cygwin nightly, and > install from that on our local network. > > The problem he's having is that when getting to the

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 13:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > One of the people here is trying to install Cygwin for the first time > ever on his Win2k PC. We update a mirrored copy of Cygwin nightly, and > install from that on our local network. > > The problem he's having is that when getting to the

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd still be interested to know what setup is doing at that point. It > might give us a clue as to why setup's performance varies across such a > wide range. (If Cygwin was already installed, could we strace > setup.exe?) no - it's not a

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd still be interested to know what setup is doing at that point. It > might give us a clue as to why setup's performance varies across such a > wide range. (If Cygwin was already installed, could we strace > setup.exe?) no - it's not a

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang[Scanned]

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd still be interested to know what setup is doing at that point. It > might give us a clue as to why setup's performance varies across such a > wide range. (If Cygwin was already installed, could we strace > setup.exe?) no - it's not a

Re: bug in "ar" when creating libraries on cross linked filesystems

On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 23:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > r "Services for Unix from Microsoft" is buggy. Maybe it is more successful to make > the rename > command in "libc" more robust than waiting for ... Why not just stop using SFU, and use cygwin alone? Cygwin's ranlib doesn't have thi

Re: bug in "ar" when creating libraries on cross linked filesystems

On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 23:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > r "Services for Unix from Microsoft" is buggy. Maybe it is more successful to make > the rename > command in "libc" more robust than waiting for ... Why not just stop using SFU, and use cygwin alone? Cygwin's ranlib doesn't have thi

Re: setup.hint / ldesc

On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 05:33, Sam Steingold wrote: > > The description of the setup.ini/setup.hint "language" at > > http://cygwin.com/setup.html is accurate. > > any plans to add something like that? > E.g., is a field starts with $, pass it to the shell... > > ldesc is not used at this time, so

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 13:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > One of the people here is trying to install Cygwin for the first time > ever on his Win2k PC. We update a mirrored copy of Cygwin nightly, and > install from that on our local network. > > The problem he's having is that when getting to the

Re: Setup.exe seems to hang

On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'd still be interested to know what setup is doing at that point. It > might give us a clue as to why setup's performance varies across such a > wide range. (If Cygwin was already installed, could we strace > setup.exe?) no - it's not a

Re: Bug in lynx setup.hint? (was: Re: cygcrypto-0.9.7.dll)

On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 08:20, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > The colons are just cosmetically, AFAICT. Setup doesn't need them. Setup needs them. Rob -- GPG key available at: . signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1

On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 21:35, Jason Tishler wrote: Well, given the brief feedback on my request, I can only really guess. My WAG is that setup needs the cygwin ntsec acl conversion logic ported to it, along with some method to determine whether it should use it or not. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key ava

RE: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1

On Mon, 2003-08-04 at 07:03, Seth Rubin wrote: > Dunno. I just ran cygwin's standard setup (i.e. "install now" from > website). Well, If you can find out - for example by trying - then I can analyse the problem further. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key available at:

RE: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe

On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 03:24, Alan Miles wrote: > Rob, > > Sorry it has been a looong week ... with quite a number of looong weeks > ahead, > and I misinterpreted your response. > > Anyway, I appreciate your responses. I am going to try a preremove script. I > have just checked http://cygwin.com/s

Re: bug in setup.exe for postgresql-7.3.4-1

> > 3) Looked at postgres.exe. > > > > $ ls -l /usr/bin/postgre* > > -rwxr-x---+ 1 OwnerUsers 1985024 Aug 1 16:02 > > /usr/bin/postgres.exe > > The permissions of postgres.exe is correct in the tarball: > > $ tar -tvjf postgresql-7.3.4-1.tar.bz2 usr/bin/postgres.exe >

Re: Allowing cygwin setup to patch up old versions

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 23:55, chris wrote: > The other major thing is that what I diff is (obviously) the .tar files, > not the .tar.bz2 files, as even a small change to a file usually totally > changes a compressed version of it. The only problem I can see this > causing is that the bzip2 file

RE: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 21:45, Alan Miles wrote: > Rob, > > Thanks for the message. > > However, my "packages" did NOT create these directories - I just wish to > mount them, therefore setup should not be deleting them. For example, I understand that. Which part of my email suggested I did not und

Re: Setup bug --- probably already reported and fixed, of course

On Sat, 2003-08-02 at 01:30, Harold L Hunt II wrote: > FYI --- In further testing, archive.progeny.com is the mirror that has > not been updated yet. Selecting only archive.progeny.com gives me the > warning about setup.ini being older than when I last installed Cygwin. > Selecting only mirrors

Re: 'setup.exe' under Win2K Terminal Server in AS mode

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 09:06, msg wrote: > Greetings: > > I've been running 1.3.22 for some months now on a Win2K Server running > Terminal Services in Application Server mode for a variety of > development > projects and am pleased overall; however the entire installation was > done manually for t

Re: Question regarding problem during uninstall using setup.exe

On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 10:21, Alan Miles wrote: > > I don't believe it should be doing the > > rmdir H:\CygnusSolutions-Cygwin Files\CygwinMachine_Package_Dirs\dest > rmdir H:\CygnusSolutions-Cygwin Files\CygwinMachine_Package_Dirs\build > > commands, and I am not sure if this is a setup.exe iss

Re: RFC: Allowing cygwin setup to patch up old versions

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 19:11, chris wrote: > I would like to try to pull this into the main cygwin setup tree, and > was wondering if there is any kind of document that specifies exactly > how files will be set out on both the computer and the server, of if I > should just parse the code and see

Re: upgrade question

On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 20:22, Max Bowsher wrote: > Rob Clack wrote: > > Thank you for this. However, I managed to find a disaster in there > > despite everything. :o( > > > > I renamed the whole e:\cygwin tree to e:\old_cygwin. I had to rerun the > > install several times, for reasons I need not

Re: GPL alert ? http://thinstall.com/unix_tools/

On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 23:19, Christopher Faylor wrote: > I noticed that but i was wondering if these were actually cygwin tools. > Has anyone verified that? No, but: "You are now running bash.exe from the cygwin package." That plus more descriptive text is in the screenshots on the unix_tools p

GPL alert ? http://thinstall.com/unix_tools/

http://thinstall.com/unix_tools/ seems to have cygwin binaries w/out source. Rob -- GPG key available at: . signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Ideas re problem reporting

On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 19:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 16 Jul, Robert Collins wrote: > > However, a registry entry won't correct this: only the user knows > > exactly what tool they used, unless we go down some insane DRM style > > path - and I won't

Re: Ideas re problem reporting

On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 15:43, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:31:00PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: > >On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > > >> cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output > >> fro

Re: Ideas re problem reporting

On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote: > cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output > from cycheck doesn't include package information, then the packages > weren't installed via setup.exe. I've seen at least one script that (badly) reverse engineered setup

Re: How to emulate pthread_yield

On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 07:49, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Still porting a piece of software from Linux to Cygwin. The code uses > pthread_yield() function, but there is no such function in Cygwin's > pthread.h (I updated my copy of Cygwin from the online setup today). Any > known workaround? I tried loo

Re: setup can't download, can't install

On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 18:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It simple vanishes while or after checking the MD5 sums. Here are the last > entries from setup.log.full: it looks like you may be downloading into your cygwin directory, which is -not- supported. Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: setup doesnt work at all and searching the archives doesntwork either

On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 11:58, Robert Collins wrote: > On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 11:24, Jordan Bortz wrote: > > So it goes without saying that I cant believe it doenst work; the setup > > fails completely on XP whether I run from local disk or from internet > > > > Is t

Re: setup doesnt work at all and searching the archives doesntwork either

On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 11:24, Jordan Bortz wrote: > So it goes without saying that I cant believe it doenst work; the setup > fails completely on XP whether I run from local disk or from internet > > Is this a known problem or what? > I mean it doesnt work at all...it usually doesnt find any pa

Re: a few questions about cvs

On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 00:20, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > Nigel, > > A local checkout of a cvs repository is no different than an extracted > source tarball (except for the "CVS" subdirectories where cvs stores its > administrative information). Igor, this is not true in the general case. sou

':' - was rsync..

Sorry for not replying in thread - I deleted the email a little fast :p. Anyway, ':' is -not- in the POSIX portable filename character set: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xbd/glossary.html#tag_004_000_ 207 ':' as a special behaviour is not a Windows invention, it harks (in windows'

Re: Problem w/ c++,threads,static initializers

Because the results are undefined, you are permitted to return EBUSY... Rob -- 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/

Re: setup problem: only ash comes as /bin/sh

On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 23:27, S.L. wrote: > >From a user point of view, I would create a 'Shells' subcategory for 'Base'. > And an intermediate step for setup to manage the /bin/sh issue (when the > user chooses more than one shell). Nope. ash is part of base. It's a required component for the c

RE: 1.3.22: TMPDIR Initialization

On Sat, 2003-04-05 at 18:58, Mark Moore wrote: > Robert, > > If the permission on the folder pointed to by $TEMP is going to be changed > during install, it seems to me it would be done by setup.exe. If not, where > would that operation be performed? Setup doesn't set any special permissions. It

RE: 1.3.22: TMPDIR Initialization

On Sat, 2003-04-05 at 17:43, Mark Moore wrote: > Christopher, > > I've read the http://cygwin.com/lists.html. Here's the description for the > mailing list I posted to: ... > The passage "[cygwin-apps] is the preferred location for design discussions > and bug reports regarding cygwin's setup.ex

Re: setup.exe final pre-release..

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 20:42, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > I've been following this discussion from the sidelines for a while.. hope > you don't mind be butting in. Oh, terribly. No gold stars for you. ;]. > On 4 Apr 2003, Robert Collins wrote: > > Setup doesn&#x

Re: setup.exe final pre-release..

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 19:22, Max Bowsher wrote: > Alan Dobkin wrote: > > On 4 Apr 2003, Robert Collins wrote: > > > >> you should use apache or IIS to serve out the mirror and add > >> it to your mirror selection creen in the custom URL field. > >> >

Re: setup.exe final pre-release..

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 10:45, Alan Dobkin wrote: > I didn't mean to imply that it doesn't work now, only that the method > I've used to create the mirror doesn't seem to be the problem. It's not the problem, it's just how you are using the mirror :}. > > It's also clearly noted that cygwins loca

Re: setup.exe final pre-release..

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 07:48, Alan Dobkin wrote: > I do see the status bar and it does update fine as long as I leave > the setup window in the foreground. However, as soon as I click on > another window to let it process in the background, that's when the > behavior I described occurs. I hav

Re: setup.exe final pre-release..

Alan Dobkin wrote: On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Robert Collins wrote: Indeed, and here it is: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.10.2.1.exe I haven't experienced any setup crashes, but I have a question about it's behavior when used with the local directory option. E

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Martin Gainty wrote: Rob- How does the unsuspecting public understand what is happening here. The same way I had to: study the code, eliminate whats occuring, review the API usage, test, test, test. Does DrWatson pick this up OR is there something in the logfile Neither. DrWatson catches the segm

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Robert Collins wrote: Fantastic. I'm reinstating all the code now, .10 will be up in ~ 5 mins and (cross fingers) will also work well... A final note: this is an MS bug. The MS InitializeAcl routine appears to have a buffer overrun bug on your OS, which when combined with a buffer smaller

Re: bug with setup.exe: saw tetex-beta even though I did not selectprev

Rainer Typke wrote: I think that setup.exe presented the tetex-beta version in the list even though I did not select [prev]. Thi is by design. We have a single namespace for all packages, even if they don't have [curr] elements. In fact prev only elements get promoted to curr. But: You should

setup.exe final pre-release..

Marcel Telka wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:58:39PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: Fantastic. I'm reinstating all the code now, .10 will be up in ~ 5 mins and (cross fingers) will also work well... no crash (1000 runs). Fantastic. Thank you * very* much for your, oh, 8000 test runs.

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:38:13PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: Marcel Telka wrote: So, please try .9. I've coded to use the MS documented sizing calculation. 1000 runs, no crash :-) Fantastic. I'm reinstating all the code now, .10 will be up in ~ 5 mins

Re: Cannot install Cygwin

Michael Barr wrote: As I said, I tried this a couple different ways with a couple different ftp sites and it always ends this way. Please try a snapshot of setup from http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/ Cheers, Rob -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: So, please try .9. I've coded to use the MS documented sizing calculation. 1000 runs, no crash :-) Fantastic. I'm reinstating all the code now, .10 will be up in ~ 5 mins and (cross fingers) will also work well... Rob -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubsc

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: FWIW, this is looking like an MS bug now. If the memory size we pass into InitializeAcl causes segfaults, and the memory size is constant . Hm. I'm not looking into setup's sources now... Not asking you too :}. So, please try .9. I've coded to use the MS documente

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:24:18PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: Lets see how this goes... http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.7.exe crashes. Can you guess the next version number? FWIW, this is looking like an MS bug now. If the memory size we pass

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.6.exe Cross fingers. This calls no windows API's, just sets a single variable in memory. Good news: No crash in 1000 runs. Cool, ok adding the next line of code in, with changes to memory allocation and use. (Long de

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: Ok, 3/4 disabled... http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.5.exe Crash. http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.6.exe Cross fingers. This calls no windows API's, just sets a single variable in memory. Rob -- Unsubscribe info: http://

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 04:45:53PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: Great. Same thing, but only half the code disabled: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.4.exe Please report back.. Crashes... Ok, 3/4 disabled... http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup

Re: setup.exe troubleshooting snapshot

Marcel Telka wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 11:36:38PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: I've uploaded a new setup troubleshooting snapshot: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3-no-set_default_sec.exe This is simply 2.340.2.3 with the recently-added ntsec code deactivated. Please could an

Re: Cygwin & BitKeeper...

On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 16:10, Thomas V. Fischer wrote: > I want to install Bitkeeper on my machine that is already running Cygwin > (latest build). However and contrary to the bitkeeper FAQ, it doesn't detect > my existing installation and doesn't want to recognize it. > > If i don't install, the B

setup pre-release troubleshooting snapshot

Ok, in a (possibly futile :]) attempt to fix a bug I can't reproduce, I've made a number of minor tweaks to setup in the area where it is *most likely* crashing. So, if you are one of the lucky few that had crashes occur, please try: http://www.cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.340.2.3.2.3.exe A

Re: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 22:21, Danilo Turina wrote: > I'm using the beta in place of the stable version to keep up to date my > Cygwin installation and I have had no problems till now (WinXP SP1). Great! Thanks, Rob -- GPG key available at: . signat

Re: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 18:26, Markus Schönhaber wrote: > Robert Collins wrote: > > A new release of setup.exe is imminent. There are many changes, and to > > reduce problems, feedback from YOU, is needed. > > > > The new version is available from > > http://www

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 08:20, Max Bowsher wrote: > This bug gets more and more elusive. Plus, I had to reinstall Windows on my > desktop, and I can no-longer reproduce the crash. > > Rolf, is Service Pack 1 installed on your home machine? my hunch is that at O2 there is something being optimised

Re: Allowing EASY install of thirtd party software (RE: Two GPLclarifications)

On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 08:15, Hannu E K Nevalainen (garbage mail) wrote: > If I have "analyzed" things correctly lately; > most of the GPL violations are done in this situation: > > 1) Person "P" writes/ports some nice software using cygwin. > 2) P picks out required parts of cygwin runtime obj

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 03:36, Rolf Campbell wrote: > Well, unistalling that makes this setup work the same as the old setup. > So, does this setup do dependancy analysis different than the old one? > I would guess that this new one tries to install anything that is > depended on and not already

Re: RPM-4.1 port to cygwin available

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 21:04, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, Charles Wilson wrote: > > Robert Collins wrote: > >> I find this concern mystifiying though, we've had an rpm port from > >> Chuck for what - 3 ? 4 ? years. > > And mine wasn&#x

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

VMWare comes with tools to allow the client OS (the one inside the VM) to interface with the host OS - i.e. mouse release so that the mouse can go from inside the VM to outside easily. These tools are called. vmtools. Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:50, amores nolikeyjunk wrote: > > >VM as in running Windows on top of say Mac OS/Linux? > > Actually on top of Win2000. (Using vmware. It is the > only way I have time to test stuff on virgin machines.) I really appreciate the testing effort you are putting in - it's g

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:41, amores nolikeyjunk wrote: > Robert Collins, > > If you happen to be quite interested in this apparent problem > I've just found (altho I certainly don't know if it is > setup related or not) at this moment, and wish to discuss this via > In

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:39, amores nolikeyjunk wrote: > Now something is wrong. The symptoms you describe aren't (AFAIK) something that a setup bug could cause. I'd suggest a VMWare or windows install problem is your most likely culprit. Cheers, Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 15:13, amores nolikeyjunk wrote: > but when I reboot & run setup again, it doesn't remember > the pkg directory. I guess I don't know if it ever did, > as this is the first time I'm not running the setup.exe > out of the pkg directory. The first time through, there is a kno

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

Regarding XFree auto-installation... > > __ > Cygwin Package Information ... > libPropList 0.10.1-3 This requires XFree86-base. So setup is doing the right thing. Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 22:10, Vince Hoffman wrote: > > Ok, well this is 'not good' :}. > > > > At what point does it crash? > > > > At start before any window appears. > Shuttting down cygwin services made no difference. > let me know if there is any more i can do to help the problem. Hmm, I don

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 14:16, amores nolikeyjunk wrote: > I'll bump this once then let it drop assuming no one is > interested. > > (This is in regards to the two test installs I did, and > my considering trying other tests.) Positive feedback is always good it gives a feeling for the failure rate

Re: Fwd: Re: Another GPL violation: Re:Minimalistic Build-Environmentforwin32 (~7.5MB)

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 02:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > nobody is perfect ;) > now lets be friends again and make the world a better place with OpenSource > Software - ok ? > :) Yep. Rob -- GPG key available at: . signature.asc Description: This

Re: RPM-4.1 port to cygwin available

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 05:44, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 10:54:36AM +0100, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > >I can see it now: > >"I downloaded the abcdef RPM from my local LUG mirror and it didn't work - > >why?" > >.. umm.. Linux executable? > > I'm pretty sure that RPM

Re: Gold star for Joshua and a suggestion for setup documentation

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 16:09, Christopher Faylor wrote: > What do you think? Do we still need the words at > http://cygwin.com/download.html to exist as a separate entity? If so, > I'll probably add another documentation link to the main web page for > people who are first downloading cygwin. I

Re: Another GPL violation: Re: MinimalisticBuild-Environmentforwin32 (~7.5MB)

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 20:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On the rockbox mailinglist i used a VALID email address for_spam seemed invalid at first glance - it *appears* to be a black hole address. > - and on my win32 > sdk page is a VALID > email adress, too. I didn't see that. I stumbled a

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

Max Bowsher wrote: Robert Collins wrote: On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 02:24, Vince Hoffman wrote: Havent a clean system to try a full install. however on running it to upgrade/add packages the first run crashed . on the second run all was fine and componants were added/updated perfectly. I tried

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 03:15, Rolf Campbell wrote: > Robert Collins wrote: > > A new release of setup.exe is imminent. There are many changes, and to > > reduce problems, feedback from YOU, is needed. > > > > The new version is available from > > http://www

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 02:24, Vince Hoffman wrote: > Havent a clean system to try a full install. however on running it to > upgrade/add packages the first run crashed . > on the second run all was fine and componants were added/updated perfectly. > I tried running a few more times to reproduce the

Re: Re-setup & cygintl-[12].dll

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 02:20, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Robert Collins wrote: > > > Just a thought, > > > > It's a good one. Such scripts belong in > > /bin > > or > > /usr/bin > > > > :] > > Rob > > Y

Re: Determining the location of a Cygwin installation

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 07:51, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > Marcel Telka wrote: > > (Of course, going hand in hand with this would be a command line driven > setup.exe but perhaps we shouldn't go there just yet...) Uhh, grab the source. It's ~ 95% there. Rob -- GPG key available at:

Re: Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 00:17, Joe Buehler wrote: > Robert Collins wrote: > > > USER-VISIBLE CHANGES: > > Did you forget resizable dialogs No. > or is that not done yet? Bingo! Rob -- GPG key available at: <http://users.bigpond.net.au/robertc/keys.txt>. signatu

Corrected: setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Pavel Tsekov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> USER-VISIBLE CHANGES: Fix 'Can't open (null) for reading' errors. Setup now checks bz2 (de)compress

setup.exe beta (testing needed - really!)

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Pavel Tsekov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> USER-VISIBLE CHANGES: Fix 'Can't open (null) for reading' errors. Setup now checks bz2 (de)compress

Re: Re-setup & cygintl-[12].dll

John Morrison wrote: FYI, once /etc/passwd and /etc/group exist, they will not be automatically recreated by setup. Igor et al wrt post install scripts... :) Would it be unreasonable to have some scripts which are _never_ renamed to .done? Doing that to the /etc/postinstall/passwd-grp.sh sc

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >