[64bit] Updated: {nettle/libnettle4/libhogweed2/libnettle-devel}-2.7-1: A cryptographic library that is designed to fit easily in more or less any context

2013-05-14 Thread Dr . Volker Zell
Hi New 64bit versions of 'nettle/libnettle4/libhogweed2/libnettle-devel' have been uploaded to a server near you. o Update to latest upstream release o Build for cygwin 1.7.19 with gcc-4.8.0 nettle NEWS: === This release includes an implementation of elliptic curve

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Warren Young
On 5/13/2013 21:28, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: As these utilities are required by POSIX[1], should the vim-minimal package be added to Base? As long as when I install vim-kitchensink setup.exe knows how to quietly replace vim-minimal, I'm happy to see Vim in Base. Yes, truly happy. Gone are

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On May 14 01:07, Warren Young wrote: On 5/13/2013 21:28, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: As these utilities are required by POSIX[1], should the vim-minimal package be added to Base? As long as when I install vim-kitchensink setup.exe knows how to quietly replace vim-minimal, I'm happy to see Vim

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Frank Fesevur
2013/5/14 Warren Young wrote: On 5/13/2013 21:28, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: As these utilities are required by POSIX[1], should the vim-minimal package be added to Base? As long as when I install vim-kitchensink setup.exe knows how to quietly replace vim-minimal, I'm happy to see Vim in Base.

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On 2013-05-14 02:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote: What bugs me with vim-minimal on Fedora is usually that it's lacking basic vim functionality, even if it does not rely on external packages. I'm not quite sure if I remember correctly, but in the past I think I even had problems with color settings

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Frank Fesevur
2013/5/14 Yaakov (Cygwin/X): Apart from that, yes, vim-minimal should be a Base package, finally ;) Done. It overrides the symlink from vi to vim.exe and so this breaks my current setup: $ vi Error detected while processing /home/Frank/.vimrc: line1: E319: Sorry, the command is not

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Frank Fesevur
2013/5/14 Frank Fesevur: It overrides the symlink from vi to vim.exe and so this breaks my current setup: $ vi Error detected while processing /home/Frank/.vimrc: line1: E319: Sorry, the command is not available in this version: syntax on Press ENTER or type command to continue

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On May 14 04:35, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: On 2013-05-14 02:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote: What bugs me with vim-minimal on Fedora is usually that it's lacking basic vim functionality, even if it does not rely on external packages. I'm not quite sure if I remember correctly, but in the past I

Re: [RFC] vim-minimal in Base?

2013-05-14 Thread Warren Young
On 5/14/2013 04:19, Frank Fesevur wrote: Any thought other then fixing the symlink manually? I fixed it with alias vi=vim in my .bashrc. I've had to do that on assorted Linuxes before, too.

Re: [64bit] autoconf test for GetConsoleScreenBufferInfo

2013-05-14 Thread marco atzeri
Il 5/14/2013 9:05 PM, Corinna Vinschen ha scritto: On May 14 20:30, marco atzeri wrote: I fear you might not like my answer: The problem here is NOT that the linking works, the problem is that, if the configure test is used to find out if we're running on Windows or not, it's simply not

Re: [64bit] autoconf test for GetConsoleScreenBufferInfo

2013-05-14 Thread Charles Wilson
On 5/14/2013 3:05 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: I fear you might not like my answer: The problem here is NOT that the linking works, the problem is that, if the configure test is used to find out if we're running on Windows or not, it's simply not feasible anymore when taking x86_64 Cygwin into