On Monday 17 Feb 03, David Starks-Browning writes:
On Saturday 15 Feb 03, andrew clarke writes:
...
Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because it's
described as a work-in-progress and seemingly a bit of a moving target.
I'll see if I can make this sound less
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi all,
I was going through all this thread wondering if noone
would see the (to me as a late Un*x guy) obvious:
Consider a slow net connection, e.g by
14.4 K Modem, or as Hannu does,
several hosts to be updated. The natural thing to me
On Saturday 15 Feb 03, andrew clarke writes:
...
Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because it's
described as a work-in-progress and seemingly a bit of a moving target.
I'll see if I can make this sound less off-putting.
But I also agree with Chris, that the people who
I can't really offer much comment on this, as I do still use setup.exe to
actually install the packages. But one thing I have noticed recently, and
I'm sure someone reported it as a bug, is that setup regularly fails to
download all packages successfully. Once download is completed and we move
Dieter Meinert wrote:
I was going through all this thread wondering if noone
would see the (to me as a late Un*x guy) obvious:
Consider a slow net connection, e.g by
14.4 K Modem, or as Hannu does,
several hosts to be updated. The natural thing to me
appears to download
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Christopher Faylor
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 10:23 PM
-- 8 --
!--
cygwin install cygwin install cygwin install cygwin install
cygwin install
-- 8 --
The next time the various web crawlers inspect the page they might give a
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:31:05PM -0500, Rolf Campbell wrote:
Well, I maintain an internal mirror for my company, and I use a custom
python script to parse our custom setup.ini and fetch the needed
packages.
But, I never used sources.redhat.com.
So, translation: I have no insight into the
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 05:05:35PM +0100, Hannu E K Nevalainen (garbage mail) wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:31:05PM -0500, Rolf Campbell wrote:
Well, I maintain an internal mirror for my company, and I use a custom
python script to parse our custom setup.ini and fetch the needed
packages.
But,
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are
unaware of the setup program entirely.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are
unaware of the setup program
On 15 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 10:53, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On 15 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 09:28, Christopher Faylor wrote:
[snip]
I was also thinking of creating a '/dev/tty' file in the archive which
was just
After the install completes..
Your cygwin install is now ready to use. Please run setup.exe again
if you want to Install new packages, Remove installed packages, or
Update your install with the latest versions of your installed
packages.
I like it. Apparently it is extremely confusing
--- Corinna Vinschen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 10:00:51AM -0800, Rick Rankin wrote:
--- Corinna Vinschen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor
[snip]
Well, guess what comes up first on a Google search for cygwin install?
See for yourself: http://google.com/search?q=cygwin+install (just in
case, the first match I get is
http://www.woodsoup.org/projs/ORKiD/basic.htm,
last updated on March 24, 2000). :-(
That page worked a lot better
[snip]
Unfortunately, if you just want to install a single package, and newer
versions of other packages that you already have installed have been
released, it's cumbersome to tell Setup not to upgrade those other
packages (ie. mark them all as Keep), because you have to scroll through
the
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are unaware
of the setup program entirely.
Hmm, I think we should add a new screen to setup.exe.
After the install completes..
Your cygwin install is now ready to use.
At 10:34 2003-02-14, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
...
Can anyone offer any explanation about this? Or maybe convince me that
I'm wrong in noticing this trend? I suppose that it is possible that
we are now hitting a newer stupider
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are
unaware of the setup program
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:21:46PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
I think something's wildly wrong with the world when my handful of
crusty old pages end up as the #1 Cygwin hit on Google. ;-) I can
assure everybody that I've done nothing to try to make that the case.
I think it's part of the
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:57:23PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Isn't it, in the first place the Cygwin Package Manager? cpm?
Even the suffix of the archive files could be cpm...
It's not at all unprecedented for Windows installers to be dual-use
like Cygwin Setup is. The control panel API
At 11:21 2003-02-15, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Wow. Classic Cygwin humor, number 1 on Google!
I think something's wildly wrong with the world when my handful of crusty old
pages end up as the #1 Cygwin hit on Google. ;-) I can assure everybody that
I've done nothing to try to make that the
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:21:46PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
I think something's wildly wrong with the world when my handful of
crusty old pages end up as the #1 Cygwin hit on Google. ;-) I can
assure everybody that I've done nothing to try to make that the case.
I think it's part
At 11:21 2003-02-15, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
Wow. Classic Cygwin humor, number 1 on Google!
I think something's wildly wrong with the world when my handful of crusty old
pages end up as the #1 Cygwin hit on Google. ;-) I can assure everybody that
I've done nothing to try to make that
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 02:11:09PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:21:46PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
I think something's wildly wrong with the world when my handful of
crusty old pages end up as the #1 Cygwin hit on Google. ;-) I can
assure everybody that I've
Why not have two links on the page...
1) Cygwin Setup
2) Cygwin Package Maintainer
both of which are symb-links to setup.exe ;)
J.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:
On 15 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Or have
web crawlers changed such that this doesn't work anymore?
I'll try that. Thanks.
I wouldn't: google actively lowers your page ranking when it sees such
garbage.
Where, exactly,
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:41, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Where, exactly, did you read this (a link to some doc would be
enightening)? I see nothing about this in Googles documentation of Page
Ranking. And, google isn't the only search engine out there. I'd think
you'd want to try and get as
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 03:41:37PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On 15 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Or have
web crawlers changed such that this doesn't work anymore?
I'll try that. Thanks.
I wouldn't: google actively
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:41, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Where, exactly, did you read this (a link to some doc would be
enightening)? I see nothing about this in Googles documentation of Page
Ranking. And, google isn't the only search engine out there.
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 11:48, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:41, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Where, exactly, did you read this (a link to some doc would be
enightening)? I see nothing about this in Googles documentation of Page
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 11:48, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:41, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Where, exactly, did you read this (a link to some doc would be
enightening)? I see nothing about
At 08:47 PM 2/15/2003 -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 11:48, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On 16 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 10:41, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Where, exactly, did you read this (a link to some
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading cygwin's package .tar.bz2 files
directly and (somehow) used tar to
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading cygwin's package .tar.bz2 files
directly and (somehow) used tar to
At 10:34 2003-02-14, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
...
Can anyone offer any explanation about this? Or maybe convince me that
I'm wrong in noticing this trend? I suppose that it is possible that
we are now hitting a newer stupider brand of user
At 01:26 PM 2/14/2003 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
So, that experiment was a bad idea. I turned off access again. Yet, I
still have the feeling that many people are downloading packages
directly (from mirrors I suppose) and then we get to experience the
maddening I downloaded foo and it
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:34:59PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send Gary email about this! I'm sure he doesn't need it.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send Gary email about this! I'm sure he doesn't need it.
Ops! Too late! ;-) Only kiddin' I'm sure that's not a worry.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:55:57PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send Gary email about this! I'm sure he doesn't need it.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send Gary email about this! I'm sure he doesn't need it.
Ops! Too late! ;-) Only kiddin' I'm sure that's not a worry.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:55:57PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send Gary email about this! I'm sure he doesn't
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:55:57PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer of that page, so
Ack. I missed that fact.
Don't send
Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading cygwin's package .tar.bz2 files
directly and (somehow) used tar to extract
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading cygwin's package .tar.bz2 files
directly and
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:15:05PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
I don't think people are actually reading that paragraph at all, though. I
think that's part of the problem.
As a preventative measure, how about adding some embedded tags into the
cygwin.com home or install pages so that
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because it's
described as a work-in-progress and seemingly a bit of a moving target.
Actually, just out of interest, will new Setup programs always be
backward-compatible
Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started downloading cygwin's package .tar.bz2 files
directly and (somehow) used tar to
andrew clarke wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because
it's described as a work-in-progress and seemingly a bit of a
moving target.
Actually, just out of interest, will new Setup programs always
andrew clarke wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
Section 2 of the FAQ might also put people off using Setup because it's
described as a work-in-progress and seemingly a bit of a moving target.
Actually, just out of interest, will new Setup programs always
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:15:05PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:55:57PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:39:47PM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Well, Gary (Gary R. Van Sickle) is the maintainer
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:45:37PM +, John M. Adams wrote:
How do you get just 1 package via setup.exe?
When you reach the Select Packages dialog of setup.exe, hit the View
button (the tiny one on the upper-right...). In the table there is a
column called New (I don't know why it's called
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I tried an experiment recently where I turned on ftp access to the
cygwin download directory on sources.redhat.com. The result seemed
to be that people started
Chris,
At 13:59 2003-02-14, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
...
If I may, speaking on behalf of some of the less-technical Cygwin users,
some points:
Obviously for
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 02:21:18PM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Chris,
At 13:59 2003-02-14, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
...
If I may, speaking on behalf of some of
Well, I maintain an internal mirror for my company, and I use a custom
python script to parse our custom setup.ini and fetch the needed packages.
But, I never used sources.redhat.com.
Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I tried an
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 05:31:05PM -0500, Rolf Campbell wrote:
Well, I maintain an internal mirror for my company, and I use a custom
python script to parse our custom setup.ini and fetch the needed packages.
But, I never used sources.redhat.com.
So, translation: I have no insight into the
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 09:28, Christopher Faylor wrote:
You know, I almost mentioned that but I think that someone (Robert
Collins maybe?) may have suggested this previously and I adamantly
intoned that these were .tar.bz2 files dammit.
We had a long thread on cygwin-apps about this ~ 18
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are unaware
of the setup program entirely.
Hmm, I think we should add a new screen to setup.exe.
After the install completes..
Your cygwin install is now ready to use.
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:31, andrew clarke wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:45:37PM +, John M. Adams wrote:
How do you get just 1 package via setup.exe?
...
So, to install a single package you will want to mark everything you
already have installed as Keep, and everything else as Skip,
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Or have
web crawlers changed such that this doesn't work anymore?
I'll try that. Thanks.
I wouldn't: google actively lowers your page ranking when it sees such
garbage.
Rob
--
GPG key available at:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:59:57PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
If you are a nontechnical cygwin user, then why would you be making
any determination of what is harmless or not harmless? I would think
that it would be the reverse -- people who really know what they're
doing (or think
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:59:57PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
If you are a nontechnical cygwin user, then why would you be making
any determination of what is harmless or not harmless? I would think
that it would be the reverse -- people who really know what they're
doing (or
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:07, andrew clarke wrote:
--08:06:16-- http://cygwin.com/setup.exe
4 Last-Modified: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 00:50:47 GMT
Hmm, nobody is working on it after all?
Thats the production release. We change that only when we are *sure*
that the new version is fully stable.
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 10:53, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On 15 Feb 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 09:28, Christopher Faylor wrote:
[snip]
I was also thinking of creating a '/dev/tty' file in the archive which
was just a real file containing the words Hey! What are
--- Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 02:21:18PM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Chris,
At 13:59 2003-02-14, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 09:42:19AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I suppose so, but, again, it seems like many people *recently* are
unaware of the setup program entirely.
Hmm, I think we should add a new screen to setup.exe.
After the install
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:08:15PM -0800, Rick Rankin wrote:
I was also thinking of creating a '/dev/tty' file in the archive which
was just a real file containing the words Hey! What are YOU DOING??? I
think that would cause a tar extraction to print that message to the
screen. Don't know
Actually, just creating a file named 'con' would probably be easier.
Isn't 'con' a reserved name in windows? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able
to extract it from the tar archive.
Regards,
Elfyn McBratney
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.exposure.org.uk
--
Unsubscribe info:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:12:49PM -0600, Robert Citek wrote:
They are using apt-get to install Cygwin. :-)
[ wishful thinking ]
you remind me of something. i once tried exactly this, but failed on
some C++ stuff which i could not resolve. some includes failed, but i
guess its within the
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:14:54AM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Actually, just creating a file named 'con' would probably be easier.
Isn't 'con' a reserved name in windows?
That's kinda the whole point.
Right...I get it now.
I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to extract it from the
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:30:09AM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:14:54AM -, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
Actually, just creating a file named 'con' would probably be easier.
Isn't 'con' a reserved name in windows?
That's kinda the whole point.
Right...I get it
Christopher Faylor wrote:
FWIW, I've recently sent email to Mumit Khan for similar reasons. His
ancient gnu-win32 site still shows up in google and some of the
outdated techniques espoused there demonstrably cause confusion.
It's even worse that you think. Last week's LWN contained a
--- Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:08:15PM -0800, Rick Rankin wrote:
I was also thinking of creating a '/dev/tty' file in the archive which
was just a real file containing the words Hey! What are YOU DOING??? I
think that would cause a tar extraction
75 matches
Mail list logo
