RE: which which

2002-01-02 Thread Morrison, John
PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, 22 December 2001 12:39 am To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: which which - Original Message - From: Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, the bottom line is that once the new version of which is uploaded, the right thing will happen

RE: which which

2002-01-02 Thread John Morrison
-Original Message- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Earnie Boyd Morrison, John wrote: Personally, I'd rather identify the apps which _arn't_ GNU. I didn't know that the (current) version of which for cygwin wasn't the GNU version. This ment that I kept wondering why it

RE: which which

2002-01-02 Thread Norman Vine
John Morrison writes: Maybe all the packages ought to state where they originated? FWIW this often helps :-) % package --version Should support for this be a requirement for all Cygwin packages ? AFAIK it is for gnu applications Cheers Norman

Re: which which

2002-01-02 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 02:27:35PM -0500, Norman Vine wrote: John Morrison writes: Maybe all the packages ought to state where they originated? FWIW this often helps :-) % package --version Should support for this be a requirement for all Cygwin packages ? AFAIK it is for gnu applications

Re: which which

2001-12-21 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:37:31PM -, Morrison, John wrote: -Original Message- From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Morrison, John wrote: And here's the setup.hint: sdesc: Displays where a particular program in your path is located ldesc: Which takes one

RE: which which

2001-12-21 Thread Morrison, John
-Original Message- From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:37:31PM -, Morrison, John wrote: -Original Message- From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Morrison, John wrote: And here's the setup.hint:

Re: which which

2001-12-21 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 03:15:33PM -, Morrison, John wrote: -Original Message- From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 12:37:31PM -, Morrison, John wrote: -Original Message- From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Re: which which

2001-12-21 Thread Robert Collins
- Original Message - From: Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, the bottom line is that once the new version of which is uploaded, the right thing will happen automatically. The only setup.hint changes that would be required are to the sdesc and ldesc. I think you should make it

Re: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Robert Collins
=== - Original Message - From: Morrison, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: which which If you'll pardon the pun, which version of which are we running? The GNU version is currently 2.13 and I just wondered if folks would

RE: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Morrison, John
I wasn't sure that: 1) we were using the GNU which (which --version doesn't work) and 2) by offering to update the package I wouldn't be offending the current(?) maintainer. J. BTW - It wasn't 1.5 in particular I wanted to know but whether it was the GNU which we were using. Which's are

Re: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Robert Collins
Ah, well I've no idea about how GNU our version is. :}. Rob === - Original Message - From: Morrison, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Robert Collins' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:23 PM Subject: RE: which which I wasn't sure that: 1) we were

Re: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 11:23:38PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: Ah, well I've no idea about how GNU our version is. :}. I contributed my own small version of which (which is version 1.5). If you want to maintain which in future, feel free to contribute the GNU version instead. I have actually

Re: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Robert Collins
- Original Message - From: Corinna Vinschen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I contributed my own small version of which (which is version 1.5). If you want to maintain which in future, feel free to contribute the GNU version instead. I have actually no problems stepping back. I'm happy with

RE: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Roth, Kevin P.
Judging by the following::: /-- $ cygcheck --help Usage: cygcheck [OPTIONS] [program ...] -s, --sysinfo = system information (not with -k) -v, --verbose = verbose output (indented) (for -s or programs) -r, --registry = registry search (requires -s)

RE: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Morrison, John
Corinna - is there any pro's/cons (besides not maintaining your own version) for/against using the GNU version? J. -Original Message- From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 20 December 2001 12:47 pm To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: which which

Re: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:29:54PM -, Morrison, John wrote: Corinna - is there any pro's/cons (besides not maintaining your own version) for/against using the GNU version? Dunno. I never compared them. If you compare them and you're under the impression the GNU version has some real

RE: which which

2001-12-20 Thread Morrison, John
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: which which On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:29:54PM -, Morrison, John wrote: Corinna - is there any pro's/cons (besides not maintaining your own version) for/against using the GNU version? Dunno. I never compared them. If you compare them and you're