On Jan 10 19:40, David Sastre wrote:
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 06:08:06PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jan 6 17:04, Andrew Schulman wrote:
New package available at:
http://www.eco-lution.tv/cygwin/release/base-files/base-files-4.0-2.tar.bz2
Do you want to renumber the packages to varnish-xxx-1 or I keep
actual name varnish-xxx-5??
The only problem with rename is that old messages in cygwin-apps
mailist can confuse in the future.
2011/1/11 David Sastre :
2011/1/11, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:23:45AM
2011/1/11, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jan 10 19:40, David Sastre wrote:
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 06:08:06PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jan 6 17:04, Andrew Schulman wrote:
New package available at:
http://www.eco-lution.tv/cygwin/release/base-files/base-files-4.0-2.tar.bz2
2011/1/11, jdzstz - gmail dot com :
2011/1/11 David Sastre :
2011/1/11, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:23:45AM +0100, David Sastre wrote:
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 07:57:23PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 08:34:03PM +0100, David Sastre wrote:
OK.
On 12/16/2010 12:01 PM, Charles Wilson wrote:
On 11/24/2010 12:41 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
On 11/24/2010 12:06 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Do you have the gcc package now?
If so, I'll download it and attempt to
create a binutils wrapper to work with it. I'm really not keen on
having a
About varnish cache application, the packages are GTG for David.
Please somebody upload the three packages (Prev, Curr and Test) to
cygwin servers. The package URL that I send in my previous email
were:
wget
On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 12:01 -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
cgf, any progress on creating a wrapper for mingw-binutils? If it's
turning out to be difficult, could we go ahead with a real
cross-configured mingw-binutils, and then maybe later update it with one
that installs simple wrapper .exe's
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 17:28 -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
-- 1 ---
The first set of packages are revisions (actually, just rearranging the
contents) of the venerable add-on packages that provide -mno-cygwin
support for gcc-3.
Why can't we keep things simple and
On 1/11/2011 8:12 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 17:28 -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
-- 1 ---
The first set of packages are revisions (actually, just rearranging the
contents) of the venerable add-on packages that provide -mno-cygwin
support
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 23:23 -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
On 1/11/2011 8:12 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Why can't we keep things simple and just dump those outright? Aside
from nostalgia, what reason do we have to continue supporting gcc3 when
AFAIK no other major distro does so?
There
10 matches
Mail list logo
