From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15518 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2008 00:09:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 15507 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Aug 2008 00:09:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (HELO out1.smtp.messagingengine.com) (66.111.4.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:08:53 +0000 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E7815550A for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 20:08:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 07 Aug 2008 20:08:51 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (user-0c6suln.cable.mindspring.com [24.110.122.183]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99378140AB; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 20:08:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <489B8E80.8070309@cwilson.fastmail.fm> Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:09:00 -0000 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080708 Thunderbird/2.0.0.16 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mailing List: CygWin-Apps Subject: Re: New snapshot of setup.exe uploaded! References: <00e201c8f8e3$e029f590$9601a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> In-Reply-To: <00e201c8f8e3$e029f590$9601a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2 Dave Korn wrote: > > Well, you've been waiting for this long enough :) What's the status with regards to a version of setup.exe for cygwin-1.7 (e.g. that doesn't try to access the registry at all, or uses its own setup-specific registry key, or whatever was decided in that area)? IOW, the please-don't-clobber-my-cygwin-1.5 version of setup-for-cygwin-1.7? Is this the one? Or is that a different development effort? -- Chuck