Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX

2002-03-15 Thread Lapo Luchini
No sideeffects;) I'm using it since a year now. Fetch my binary: http://familiehaase.de/cywgin/compression/upx/ rsync.exe 2.5.4-1 shrinks from 167936 down to 72704, and .bz2 archive too shrinks from 95901 down to 94571 (I didn't expect this one)... anyone has objections if I pack future rsync

Re: Setup.exe chooser view strangeness

2002-03-15 Thread Pavel Tsekov
Hello Pavel, Wednesday, March 13, 2002, 11:31:04 AM, you wrote: PT Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PT Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PT Received: (qmail 12196 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2002 11:36:14 - PT Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PT Received: (qmail 12193 invoked by uid 8); 13 Mar

Re: [ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.4-1

2002-03-15 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:21:47PM +0100, Lapo Luchini wrote: Ready at the same usual address: http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.4-1.tar.bz2 http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.4-1-src.tar.bz2 Uploaded. BTW: I think having 2.4.6-3 as prev version is better than having 2.5.1-1 or 2.5.2-1 as it

RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
-Original Message- From: Lapo Luchini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:48 PM But if a cygwin native version is needed nonetheless I could volunteer to package it. IMO we should have a fully self-hosted distribution. At the moment, with the _single_

RE: Setup.exe chooser view strangeness

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
I can duplicate this (I think). I should have a fix checked in shortly. Thanks for the report.. Rob -Original Message- From: Pavel Tsekov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Am I the only one observing this behaviour ? PT If I go to the chooser window and select Devel-automake I don't see

Re: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)

2002-03-15 Thread Earnie Boyd
Robert Collins wrote: -Original Message- From: Lapo Luchini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:48 PM But if a cygwin native version is needed nonetheless I could volunteer to package it. IMO we should have a fully self-hosted distribution. At the

RE: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
-Original Message- From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 12:28 AM Does UPX come with an API library that you can just use in setup? That's a nice idea, and on a related note I'm considering compressing setup.exe with UPX once it's a

RE: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
-Original Message- From: egor duda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 12:42 AM To: Robert Collins Not that i'm against inclusion of upx to cygwin distro -- it's a normal package like many others after all, but i really don't understand why somebody

Re: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Pavel Tsekov
files. The one with the extension .NEW is produced from setup-20020315.exe just some minutes ago. I wild guess is that this is caused by the new String class. This bug breaks the uninstall functionality. Packed is removed from installed.db but package contents are not removed at all. void

Fwd: Re: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Pavel Tsekov
Ooops... here are the attachments make.lst.gz.NEW Description: Binary data make.lst.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data

RE: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
... The new setup.exe (codename setup-200202) seems to break /etc/setup/package_name.lst.gz files by adding an extra null terminator character after the newline character. For more info see attached files. The one with the extension .NEW is produced from setup-20020315.exe just some minutes ago

Re[2]: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Pavel Tsekov
Got it ? I sent it to the mailing list right after the first mail. RC I don't see any files

RE: Re[2]: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
Yup.. thanks very much for noticing this. It's fixed, and a new snapshot uploaded (same name though). Rob -Original Message- From: Pavel Tsekov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 1:28 AM To: Robert Collins Cc: CygWin-Apps Subject: Re[2]: Setup ready #2

Re: RFP: UPX (Was Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX)

2002-03-15 Thread Roger
On Fri, 2002-03-15 at 08:42, egor duda wrote: Hi! Friday, 15 March, 2002 Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: RC I vote for including UPX... and Lapo makes two. Do we need a third? And RC are there any objections? Does anybody ever tried to measure if upx impose any performance

Re: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread S. Cowles
When using the setup-snapshot setup-20020315.exe for install from local directory, I get multiple Can't open (null) for reading errors. Setup then aborts without going through the other packages in the queue for installation. I found no installation messages in setup.log.full after the abort

Re: reducing binary distribution size with UPX

2002-03-15 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 01:48:13PM +0100, Lapo Luchini wrote: Uhmm, UPX should be part of the distribution first, as a maintained pacakge, before folk start packing distributed binaries with it. Do we have a volunteer to maintain UPX? UPX is quite cross-platform: you can use win32 version to

RE: Setup ready #2

2002-03-15 Thread Robert Collins
-Original Message- From: S. Cowles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 3:39 AM To: CygWin-Apps Subject: Re: Setup ready #2 When using the setup-snapshot setup-20020315.exe for install from local directory, I get multiple Can't open (null