Christopher Faylor wrote:
Does this mean that I should generate a new version of binutils?
Releasing a new binutils would help with the data alignment issue
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-09/msg00230.html
(errm...will this cause compatibility problems? I don't *think* so, but
someone
Charles Wilson wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Does this mean that I should generate a new version of binutils?
Releasing a new binutils would help with the data alignment issue
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-09/msg00230.html
(errm...will this cause compatibility problems? I don't
Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
There may be non-libtool-related instances where the .rdata issue is
biting someone, but I haven't seen any confirmed reports of that...yet.
Yes, I confirm that binaries are broken with or without
libtool-devel-latest, i.e. when popt is used and the standard:
const
Ronald Landheer-Cieslak schrieb:
Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
What are the plans to have bash 3 on Cygwin?
I've compiled it and rolled up a package as soon as it was released, but
I haven't had time to test it yet - at all. In any case, it will be
released as a test package first, but only when
Charles Wilson writes:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Does this mean that I should generate a new version of binutils?
Releasing a new binutils would help with the data alignment issue
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-09/msg00230.html
(errm...will this cause compatibility problems? I
Harold L Hunt II wrote:
... In short, porting nail (or similar free software)
to Windows has an ill effect on that software. Don't do it.
My general response to arguments like that is: fuck 'em. I'll port it
just to be a thorn in the guys side.
Bravo!!!
Gerrit
--
=^..^=
Ross Smith II wrote:
Isn't there anyone out there who can perform the dead-simple act of
packaging up nail for this purprose?
It can't be that simple to port, or someone would have already done it.
Christ, I can't even untar nail to my Cygwin box as it contains a file named
aux.c.
Besides the
Hello Harold,
your nail works (if you can read this;)
To test the direct SMTP mail with nail I have this in .mailrc
in my home directory:
set smtp=192.168.1.1
set asksub
set askcc
set askatend
set record=/var/mail/sent
set [EMAIL PROTECTED]
set hostname=familiehaase.de
Since the mail is
I want to contribute and maintain bash-2.05b-rebash-0.43, also known as
bashdb, formerly known as bash-2.05b-debugger-0.x
It will replace /bin/bash.exe
It's essentially our existing bash-2.05b-16 with all the previous cygwin
patches applied (most of them are already applied upstream), plus the
Now how did that subject line get through my spam filter?
;-)
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
Hello Harold,
your nail works (if you can read this;)
To test the direct SMTP mail with nail I have this in .mailrc
in my home directory:
set smtp=192.168.1.1
set asksub
set askcc
set askatend
Charles Wilson wrote:
The other question is, how is the .rdata is read only, you can't
change
anything there enforced? By whom? Is this something about the pei-x86
format that is enforced by the Windows Runtime Loader, or is it simply
a
convention enforced by our startup objects (crt0.o etc)?
Please upload the new minires and minires-devel, deleting the
current test version 0.98-3 and keeping 0.97-1.
Thanks
Pierre
minires
http://mysite.verizon.net/phumblet/minires-1.00-1/minires/setup.hint
http://mysite.verizon.net/phumblet/minires-1.00-1/minires/minires-1.00-1.ta
r.bz2
12 matches
Mail list logo
