On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 7:18 AM Michel Robitaille wrote:
Running setup-x86_64.exe (version 3.3.6) requires an app on Windows 11
> (fully up to date).
> It is looking for an app that does not exist with Microsoft Store.
>
What app is it requiring?
--
Problem reports:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 18:20, Jim Garrison via Cygwin wrote:
>
> On 11/21/22 08:03, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:19, Michel Robitaille wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Running setup-x86_64.exe (version 3.3.6) requires an app on Windows 11
> >> (fully up to date).
> >> It
On 11/21/22 08:03, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:19, Michel Robitaille wrote:
Hello,
Running setup-x86_64.exe (version 3.3.6) requires an app on Windows 11 (fully
up to date).
It is looking for an app that does not exist with Microsoft Store.
This was not required for any
On 21/11/2022 16:23, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 12:46, Jon Turney wrote:
- Add view modes "Removable" and "Unneeded" (thanks to Christian Franke)
-- "Removable" shows installed packages that were selected, but can now
be safely removed, as no installed package depends on them
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 12:46, Jon Turney wrote:
> - Add view modes "Removable" and "Unneeded" (thanks to Christian Franke)
>
> -- "Removable" shows installed packages that were selected, but can now
> be safely removed, as no installed package depends on them
> -- "Unneeded" shows packages which
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 14:19, Michel Robitaille wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Running setup-x86_64.exe (version 3.3.6) requires an app on Windows 11 (fully
> up to date).
> It is looking for an app that does not exist with Microsoft Store.
>
> This was not required for any of the previous version.
>
> Is
Hello,
Running setup-x86_64.exe (version 3.3.6) requires an app on Windows 11 (fully
up to date).
It is looking for an app that does not exist with Microsoft Store.
This was not required for any of the previous version.
Is there a solution to fix this?
For now I am using the previous version.
On 20/11/2022 08:46, Thomas Wolff wrote:
In case we ever need it, one of our setup maintainers packaged
osslsigncode:
https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/osslsigncode-src.html
Packaging error: the binary is placed in /usr
Thanks for pointing this out.
It seems this was an upstream
On Nov 20 13:45, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 17:17:18 +, Jon Turney wrote:
> > On 18/11/2022 21:15, Dale McCoy wrote:
> > > I use Cygwin in the course of work, and while I can use the external gpg
> > > signature to verify the validity of setup-x86_64.exe, my IT department
> > >
On Nov 21 13:39, ASSI wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > The idea is that the installation tree has POSIXy permissions and
> > administrative users have the right to change stuff. The administrators
> > group is part of the user's token if the process has been started
> > elevated, so, to me,
On Nov 18 12:30, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 15:51:34 +, Jon Turney wrote:
> > On 14/11/2022 21:29, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> > > Can I throw resources at a solution? If so what?
>
> > Sure, if that's what you want to do.
> > According surveys, 32-bit Windows has a fraction of 1%
A new version of Setup (2.923) has been uploaded to:
https://cygwin.com/setup-x86_64.exe (64 bit version)
https://cygwin.com/setup-x86.exe (32 bit version)
Changes compared to 2.919:
- Add perpetual support for preremove scripts (thanks to Christian Franke)
- Major update to libsolv
A new version of Setup (2.923) has been uploaded to:
https://cygwin.com/setup-x86_64.exe (64 bit version)
https://cygwin.com/setup-x86.exe (32 bit version)
Changes compared to 2.919:
- Add perpetual support for preremove scripts (thanks to Christian Franke)
- Major update to libsolv
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> The idea is that the installation tree has POSIXy permissions and
> administrative users have the right to change stuff. The administrators
> group is part of the user's token if the process has been started
> elevated, so, to me, this looks like a natural choice.
As I
On Nov 20 20:05, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Jon Turney writes:
> > I believe that the intent of the code in setup is that there should
> > only be two modes:
> >
> > USER: install "for me", with the users primary group
>
> As I understand it, the intention here was that the user can have a
> "single
On Nov 20 18:43, Takashi Yano wrote:
> - The codes related to pty and console in spawn.cc have been moved
> into the new class fhandler_termios::spawn_worker, and make spawn.cc
> call them. The functionality has not been changed at all.
This is great, thanks!
Corinna
On Nov 18 09:23, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Corinna,
>
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> > However, two points:
> >
> > - I'm wondering if the patch (both of yours) doesn't actually just cover
> > a problem in child_info_spawn::worker(). Different runpath values,
> >
On Nov 18 09:18, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Corinna,
>
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Nov 10 16:16, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > With this context in mind, I would like to ask to integrate the patch
> > > as-is, including the HOMEDRIVE/HOMEPATH and USERPROFILE
18 matches
Mail list logo
