At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote:
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing
everything available, in particular including
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote:
As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does
address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a
variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known
until after
* Peter A. Castro (2004-02-12 08:03 +0100)
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote:
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing
everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 .
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote:
At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote:
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote:
As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does
address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a
variant or something different than
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:06:15AM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206)
fixes the problem.
Did you report the fact that the problem was fixed? I don't see it in
the archives.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info:
At 01:06 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote:
At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote:
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 01:40:58PM -0500, Larry Hall wrote:
At 01:06 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
Still, I feel it's best for most regular users to wait for the official
release instead of possibly compromising their current environment.
I guess I'd soften that statement by saying
At 01:21 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote:
As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does
address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 10:16:07 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have
fixed today. We'll see.
Just to let you know that the Emacs problems (inconsistent
behavior and
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:04:15PM +0200, Ehud Karni wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 10:16:07 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have
fixed today. We'll see.
Just to let you know that the Emacs problems (inconsistent
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:33:41 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I say the current snapshot has problems and you send email saying
the current snapshot has problems.
Doesn't sound like much information is flowing...
May be I
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:06:15AM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206)
fixes the problem.
Did you report the fact that the problem was fixed? I don't see it in
the archives.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote:
I have to preface this by saying it's quite long and very OT. If you
have something better to do, like fixing bugs, by all means skip reading
the rest of this.
At 01:21 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:44:18PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
I had though that, perhaps, in a fit of displeasure with my email
contents of past, you'd setup a filter specifically to block certain
emails from me, but I suppose that's just paranoid delusion on my part
:)
You give yourself *way*
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:44:18PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote:
I had though that, perhaps, in a fit of displeasure with my email
contents of past, you'd setup a filter specifically to block certain
emails from me, but I suppose that's just
OK Peter, clearly you feel strongly about your position and I'm not trying
to change that. I'm not suggesting that people should be force-fed Cygwin
or it's snapshots. I'm not implying that everyone should be using them
all the time. I'm just trying to raise awareness generally of their
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing
everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in
a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly
At 05:48 PM 2/11/2004, Morris Siegel you wrote:
My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with
Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything
available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I
19 matches
Mail list logo
