On 3/2/2012 1:33 PM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
From: Christopher Faylor
For the record, I don't think Yaakov, Corinna, or I are really
interested in spending our time adding some sort of suggestion
mechanism
to setup.exe. This would have ramifications both for setup.exe, for
the
script
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 10:31:54PM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
On 3/2/2012 11:43 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 01:11:49AM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
On 3/1/2012 1:38 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz
Greetings, Achim Gratz!
As long as setup.exe doesn't handle recommendations, how about having
an (empty) package X-application (or whatever better name you come up
with) that all such applications depend on? I'm still not sure how to
get the actual warning to the user, but for starters the
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 01:11:49AM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
On 3/1/2012 1:38 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
You don't think that Setup telling the user package xyz requires
package xinit might at least tip
From: Robert Miles
Does it always require xinit, or only sometimes?
Sometimes.
If only sometimes, why
should it always be installed even for computers where there is no
need
for it?
It should be always be installed if the benefits of always installing it
outweigh the benefits of not
From: Christopher Faylor
For the record, I don't think Yaakov, Corinna, or I are really
interested in spending our time adding some sort of suggestion
mechanism
to setup.exe. This would have ramifications both for setup.exe, for
the
script which updates setup.ini, and for the genini
From: Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
I haven't seen any questions that I haven't already answered (although
it would help if your mail client was capable of preserving a thread).
Sorry about that. Hopefully I've cleared up the threading problem now. Please
let me know if you are still seeing a
From: Achim Gratz [mailto:strom...@nexgo.de]
I do and FTR: I don't want the cygwin Xorg server to be a dependency
to
all programs that might use X because that would pull in a lot of
packages that I have no use for on most systems.
Right, that would be a disadvantage of making xinit a
On 3/2/2012 11:43 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 01:11:49AM -0600, Robert Miles wrote:
On 3/1/2012 1:38 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
[snip]
I suspect not, but I would like to see
On 3/2/2012 1:02 PM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
From: Achim Gratz [mailto:strom...@nexgo.de]
I do and FTR: I don't want the cygwin Xorg server to be a dependency
to
all programs that might use X because that would pull in a lot of
packages that I have no use for on most systems.
Right,
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Using X requires user intervention to start an X server first. No
amount of automatic dependencies will change this, and therefore I
don't
expect that the number of questions would change one iota.
You don't think that Setup telling the user package xyz requires
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
please be assured that this will not happen.
OK, what would cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something?
--
Matt Seitz (matseitz)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
please be assured that this will not happen.
OK, what would cause someone to add xinit as a dependency
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 09:54:23AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
please be assured that this will not happen.
OK, what
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 09:54:23AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:07:33AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Matt Seitz (matseitz)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
please be assured that this will
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 09:54:23AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:07:33AM -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Matt Seitz (matseitz)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
TK does not require an X server running on the same system. This has
been explained in this very thread.
If you have points to make, don't make them with a aolme too/aol
unless you're planning on addressing the issues that Yaakov
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Yaakov posted the rationale. You responded to it. Additional
messages
insisting how much you want this are really pretty pointless.
Sorry, I don't mean to be a pest. I'll wait and see if Yaakov replies
to my latest questions.
--
Problem reports:
[your mailer doesn't set In-Reply-To correctly, which means you are
starting a bunch of new threads instead of replying in-thread]
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Using X requires user intervention to start an X server first. No
amount of
On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
You don't think that Setup telling the user package xyz requires
package xinit might at least tip off some users that running xyz now
requires starting an X server?
Even if it doesn't reduce the
On 3/1/2012 8:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
[your mailer doesn't set In-Reply-To correctly, which means you are
starting a bunch of new threads instead of replying in-thread]
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Using X requires user intervention to start
Earnie Boyd ear...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
And what Windows user who casually installs Cygwin has access to an X
server?
I do and FTR: I don't want the cygwin Xorg server to be a dependency to
all programs that might use X because that would pull in a lot of
packages that I have no use
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 10:42 -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Yaakov posted the rationale. You responded to it. Additional
messages
insisting how much you want this are really pretty pointless.
Sorry, I don't mean to be a pest. I'll wait and see if Yaakov
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 21:40 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
Earnie Boyd ear...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
And what Windows user who casually installs Cygwin has access to an X
server?
I do and FTR: I don't want the cygwin Xorg server to be a dependency to
all programs that might use X
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 2:15 AM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Now please excuse me while I get back to orchestrating the next major
transition for the distro.
Yaakov
Thanks very much for this.
Marco
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) yselkow...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
Thank you for reinforcing my point.
No, thank you for all your work, because without that we couldn't have
this discussion.
While we certainly promote the Cygwin/X server, forcing
xorg-server/xinit as a dependency not only won't
On 3/1/2012 12:07 PM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Matt Seitz (matseitz)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
In the meantime, if people are piling on to suggest this because they
think it will cause someone to add xinit as a dependency to something
please be assured that this will not happen.
OK, what
On 3/1/2012 1:38 PM, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
On 03/01/2012 01:05 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 03/01/2012 10:53 AM, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
You don't think that Setup telling the user package xyz requires
package xinit might at least tip off some users that running xyz now
requires starting an X
Previously bin/wish was a link to wish84.exe (from memory).
Recently it was upgraded to wish 8.5.exe. Now, unless X is
also running, wish fails ... I'm not quite certain which
recently upgraded package led to this: tcl-tk or tcltk ..?
The tcltk libraries now require a running X server in
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 08:24 +, Fergus wrote:
OK, thanks. I'm really miserable about this advance which has messed
badly with my preferred MO (amongst other things, not using X).
The old 8.4 win32 tcl/tk was unmaintained and broken in many ways, as
discussed at length on these lists, and
Fergus writes:
Q2 In some other contexts Cygwin provides nox versions additionally
to versions requiring a running X server. Is there any chance that
tcl-tk-8.4 could be recovered and offered as a nox version?
+1
Please!
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of
On Feb 29 09:41, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
Fergus writes:
Q2 In some other contexts Cygwin provides nox versions additionally
to versions requiring a running X server. Is there any chance that
tcl-tk-8.4 could be recovered and offered as a nox version?
+1
Please!
If you manage to do
Christopher Faylor wrote:
The only thing that apparently needs addressing is that you read the
list and comprehend what's going on. I wish we could address that by
making more people do that. :-)
Would it help to add xinit to the requirements for tcl-tk and other
packages that now require
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 13:43 -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Would it help to add xinit to the requirements for tcl-tk and other
packages that now require an X11 server?
I know that there are some use cases where xinit isn't actually
required. But would the benefit (fewer problem reports
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 06:57:27PM -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 13:43 -0800, Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
Would it help to add xinit to the requirements for tcl-tk and other
packages that now require an X11 server?
I know that there are some use cases where xinit
On 02/24/2012 08:25 AM, Fergus wrote:
Previously bin/wish was a link to wish84.exe (from memory). Recently it
was upgraded to wish 8.5.exe.
Now, unless X is also running, wish fails with
$ wish
% Application initialization failed: no display name and no $DISPLAY
environment variable
I'm
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 09:09:02AM -0600, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
On 02/24/2012 08:25 AM, Fergus wrote:
Previously bin/wish was a link to wish84.exe (from memory). Recently it
was upgraded to wish 8.5.exe.
Now, unless X is also running, wish fails with
$ wish
% Application initialization failed:
39 matches
Mail list logo
