From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24437 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2002 16:03:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 24114 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2002 16:03:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web20001.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.225.46) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 2002 16:03:23 -0000 Message-ID: <20020107160319.95570.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [12.41.224.3] by web20001.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 07 Jan 2002 08:03:19 PST Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 08:03:00 -0000 From: Joshua Franklin Subject: Re: announcements trapped by anti-viral filter To: cygwin@cygwin.com In-Reply-To: <1010315016.8208.ezmlm@cygwin.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00291.txt.bz2 Well, I guess I'll post this to the cygwin list then. I thought the whole point of a mailing list was to have a place where people could get a problem solved and others can search for the same problem later. I knew of a way around a stupid corporate virus filter. So, I posted to the original list and CC'd the poster. I thought it might be confusing to someone searching the archives to find a message on cygwin-apps with no reply. > Reply-to: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > > What is this discussion doing here? > > I'm getting REALLY sick of having to continually > police this mailing list. > > I don't know why people can't keep the really simple > rule straight. > > Does this have something to do with applications > that are distributed > with cygwin? No? Then keep it in > cygwin@cygwin.com. > > It's particularly puzzling why you would redirect > this here when there is > no guarantee that the original poster is even > subscribed to cygwin-apps. > > cgf > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 08:24:30PM -0800, Joshua > Franklin wrote: > >You might also try getting a free-mail account from > >one of the ones that allow POPing--say, Yahoo! ;) > >Subscribe that to cygwin-apps and add > >pop.mail.yahoo.com to your email-fetching client. > >(You have to set a preference in Yahoo! Mail's > options > >to allow pop access, FWIW.) > > > >> I thoroughly agree with you about filter quality. > >> However, this is at > >> Corporate firewall level, and admin will NOT be > >> changing it, (so said the > >> helpdesk). I would dearly love to be able to > control > >> my own inbound > >> filtering, since I practice "safe hex", but > that's > >> not likely to be allowed > >> soon. Sigh. > >> > >> Thanks for your to-the-point suggestions, but I > >> can't use them right now. > >> > >> Isaac Stoddard > >> Boeing Space & Communications, ISS GN&C > Integration, > >> Mail Code HM5-20, Tower II cube 5255 > >> voice: (281) 244-4246 fax: (281)244- > > ATTACHMENT part 3 message/rfc822 > Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 13:01:38 -0500 > From: "David A. Cobb" > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > Subject: Gary's Setup.exe v2.162 > > Downloaded 01/04/02, > Some uglinesses: > > CHOOSER: > View:Category > Click category=Base ('cause it's numerous), observe > painting of text > quits after about 8 lines. White space is painted > sufficient to fit the > "missing" text. Further digging reveals that > painting text of the > package names quits at y=~2/3 height, by the time I > tried expanding > Graphics it only painted 1 package. > Click category=Doc, observe program "wants" to > Uninstall libxml2 & > libxslt. After a few more games, selected > "Experimental". Now Doc > category "wants" to keep xml2 & xslt but *uninstall* > man & newlib-man. > Select "Prev", observe the program now wants to > uninstall anything for > which it doesn't find a "prev". IMHO "prev" should > *skip* any package > where it's not possible to back up. > > View:Full or Partial > Same ugliness as above, painting of package names > quits at y=2/3. > Play with the vertical scroll. Doing it slowly > left me with *nothing* in > the display area - once I scrolled the fractured > text up off the display > it doesn't come back. > Play QUICKLY with the vertical scroll. Fragments > of text show up, > unintelligable, at divers points in the list of > packages. > -- > David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access > Advocate. > New PGP key 09/13/2001: > : > Fingerprint=0x{E7C6_4EE2_6B75_5BA3_C52E__77FA_63C3_9366_DCFB_229B} > "By God's Grace I am a Christian man, by my actions > a great sinner." > --The Way of a Pilgrim, R. M. French [tr.] > Potentially Viral Software is any software for which > you are not allowed > to examine the source. Do not buy or use > Potentially Viral Software! > > > > ATTACHMENT part 4 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "David A. Cobb" , > > Subject: Re: Gary's Setup.exe v2.162 > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 09:28:18 +1100 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David A. Cobb" > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 5:01 AM > Subject: Gary's Setup.exe v2.162 > > > > Downloaded 01/04/02, > > Some uglinesses: > > > > CHOOSER: > > View:Category > > Click category=Base ('cause it's numerous), > observe painting of text > > quits after about 8 lines. White space is painted > sufficient to fit > the > > "missing" text. Further digging reveals that > painting text of the > > package names quits at y=~2/3 height, by the time > I tried expanding > > Graphics it only painted 1 package. > > Click category=Doc, observe program "wants" to > Uninstall libxml2 & > > libxslt. After a few more games, selected > "Experimental". Now Doc > > category "wants" to keep xml2 & xslt but > *uninstall* man & newlib-man. > > Select "Prev", observe the program now wants to > uninstall anything for > > which it doesn't find a "prev". IMHO "prev" > should *skip* any package > > where it's not possible to back up. > > Thank you thank you thank you. This is the new > prev/curr/exp behaviour I > asked for feedback on back in early december. > Woohoo! > > My concept is that upset gets told to fill in the > gaps - so that > packages without a prev on disk, or in setup.ini get > given the same > version twice in setup.ini - once as prev and once > as curr. > Similar logic applies to test, except that a package > with test, but no > curr or prev is only listed in test. > > > View:Full or Partial > > Same ugliness as above, painting of package names > quits at y=2/3. > > Play with the vertical scroll. Doing it slowly > left me with *nothing* > in > > the display area - once I scrolled the fractured > text up off the > display > > it doesn't come back. > > Play QUICKLY with the vertical scroll. Fragments > of text show up, > > unintelligable, at divers points in the list of > packages. > > Very strange. I don't see the graphical issues. > These may have been > fixed in CVS - can you try building locally. If you > cannot try that than > I can put a new snapshot up. > > I fixed a few fenceposts errors yesterday.. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 5 message/rfc822 > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > To: > Subject: RE: Gary's Setup.exe v2.162 > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 04:09:00 -0600 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com > > [mailto:cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com]On Behalf Of > David A. Cobb > > > > Downloaded 01/04/02, > > Some uglinesses: > > > > Thanks for taking a look at this David. First thing > though: vz. 2.162 isn't > current. Did you get this from the link to my own > site that I posted a week or > so ago? If so I have to apologize; I neglected to > pull that down when > subsequent snapshots became available (i just pulled > it now). Current build > from HEAD of cvs shows vz. 2.169. > > > CHOOSER: > > View:Category > > Click category=Base ('cause it's numerous), > observe painting of text > > quits after about 8 lines. White space is painted > sufficient to fit the > > "missing" text. Further digging reveals that > painting text of the > > package names quits at y=~2/3 height, by the time > I tried expanding > > Graphics it only painted 1 package. > > I'm not seeing anything like this whatsoever. > Sounds extremely bizzarre, as a > WAG is it maybe old video drivers? > > > Click category=Doc, observe program "wants" to > Uninstall libxml2 & > > libxslt. > > Both show "skip" for me; I don't have either > installed yet on this machine. > > > After a few more games, selected "Experimental". > Now Doc > > category "wants" to keep xml2 & xslt but > *uninstall* man & newlib-man. > > Yep, this I see. I read Rob's explanation and FWICT > this isn't the intended > behavior overall, but there's some question as to > where it should be dealt with. > > > Select "Prev", observe the program now wants to > uninstall anything for > > which it doesn't find a "prev". IMHO "prev" > should *skip* any package > > where it's not possible to back up. > > > > Yeah, I agree, and again I believe the above comment > applies. Rob, speaking > from a position of relative ignorance on this > particular issue, I don't think we > should rely on this being handled solely in > setup.ini if it's possible to do so > in setup.exe itself, at least as a second line of > defense. Invariably something > will get into setup.ini not-quite-right, and setup > will start uninstalling > people's mans, etc. > > > View:Full or Partial > > Same ugliness as above, painting of package names > quits at y=2/3. > > Play with the vertical scroll. Doing it slowly > left me with > > *nothing* in > > the display area - once I scrolled the fractured > text up off the display > > it doesn't come back. > > Play QUICKLY with the vertical scroll. Fragments > of text show up, > > unintelligable, at divers points in the list of > packages. > > Again I see nothing remotely like this (nor did I > notice anything like it in > older builds for that matter). Which OS are you on? > > BTW: Setup.exe isn't *all* mine ;-). Only the > bug-free parts; I don't know > who's sneaking those bugs in there ;-). > > -- > Gary R. Van Sickle > Brewer. Patriot. > > > ATTACHMENT part 6 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > , > > Subject: Re: Gary's Setup.exe v2.162 > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 21:22:57 +1100 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > > > After a few more games, selected > "Experimental". Now Doc > > > category "wants" to keep xml2 & xslt but > *uninstall* man & > newlib-man. > > > > Yep, this I see. I read Rob's explanation and > FWICT this isn't the > intended > > behavior overall, but there's some question as to > where it should be > dealt with. > > Yes. I've discussed this in more detail a while > back. > > > Yeah, I agree, and again I believe the above > comment applies. Rob, > speaking > > from a position of relative ignorance on this > particular issue, I > don't think we > > should rely on this being handled solely in > setup.ini if it's possible > to do so > > in setup.exe itself, at least as a second line of > defense. Invariably > something > > will get into setup.ini not-quite-right, and setup > will start > uninstalling > > people's mans, etc. > > The issue is one of knowledge, and of just how the > prev/curr/test split > *ought* to behave. IMO the debian (groan) model of > three independent > distributions is a good basis to work off. One > absolutely stable, one > with the packages that aren't bleeding edge but are > not much older, and > one bleeding edge. > > However I don't like the difficulties in picking and > choosing between > the debian distributions, so copying that model > doesn't appeal (every > say *whew*). > > On the other hand, I don't like the fact that we > maintainers have to > think very carefully before introducing a new > package/variant because we > can trash everybody all at once - and there is no > window for testing new > packages. From that angle I LOVE the concept of > being able to run in > 'test' as the default for setup.exe, and have > everything test installed. > > However: Supplying that capability means we must not > promote packages > with no test: version to test, because if we do > that, packages can not > be removed from test and left in prev or curr. Why > would we want to do > that? Well take tetex-beta for instance. When the > new tetex comes > around, it may well need some testing, so it should > be test only, but > tetex-beta should no longer be available as test. > > The point where the information is available to > determine this is > setup.hint.... > > As for getting the wrong thing into setup.ini, with > upset I don't think > that this is an issue. Even if this did happen, it's > easier to publish a > new setup.ini than a new setup.exe - one is always > updated :}. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 7 message/rfc822 > From: Mark Bradshaw > To: "'cygwin-apps@cygwin.com'" > > Subject: whois package > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 16:47:23 -0500 > > I finally got around to putting together the whois > package I talked about > back in December. If whoever handles new packages > could take a look at it > and check it out I'd appreciate it. > > Files are at: > http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/setup.hint > http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/whois-4.5.15-1-src.tar.bz2 > http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/whois-4.5.15-1.tar.bz2 > > Mark > > ATTACHMENT part 8 message/rfc822 > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:16:37 -0500 > From: Christopher Faylor > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: whois package > Reply-to: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 04:47:23PM -0500, Mark > Bradshaw wrote: > >I finally got around to putting together the whois > package I talked about > >back in December. If whoever handles new packages > could take a look at it > >and check it out I'd appreciate it. > > > >Files are at: > >http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/setup.hint > > BZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. > > *Post* the setup.hint file. > > cgf > > ATTACHMENT part 9 message/rfc822 > From: Mark Bradshaw > To: "'cygwin-apps@cygwin.com'" > > Subject: RE: whois package > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:20:03 -0500 > > picky, picky. :o) > > sdesc: "GNU Whois" > ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to retrieve > information on domains name, IP addresses, and > more." > category: Net > requires: cygwin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf@redhat.com] > > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 5:17 PM > > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > > Subject: Re: whois package > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 04:47:23PM -0500, Mark > Bradshaw wrote: > > >I finally got around to putting together the > whois package I > > talked about > > >back in December. If whoever handles new > packages could > > take a look at it > > >and check it out I'd appreciate it. > > > > > >Files are at: > > >http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/setup.hint > > > > BZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. > > > > *Post* the setup.hint file. > > > > cgf > > > > ATTACHMENT part 10 message/rfc822 > From: Mark Bradshaw > To: "'cygwin-apps@cygwin.com'" > > Subject: RE: whois package > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:26:35 -0500 > > small type correction: > > sdesc: "GNU Whois" > ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to retrieve > information on domain names, IP addresses, and > more." > category: Net > requires: cygwin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark Bradshaw > > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 5:20 PM > > To: 'cygwin-apps@cygwin.com' > > Subject: RE: whois package > > > > > > picky, picky. :o) > > > > sdesc: "GNU Whois" > > ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows > > you to retrieve > > information on domains name, IP addresses, and > more." > > category: Net > > requires: cygwin > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf@redhat.com] > > > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 5:17 PM > > > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > > > Subject: Re: whois package > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 04:47:23PM -0500, Mark > Bradshaw wrote: > > > >I finally got around to putting together the > whois package I > > > talked about > > > >back in December. If whoever handles new > packages could > > > take a look at it > > > >and check it out I'd appreciate it. > > > > > > > >Files are at: > > > > >http://www.networksimplicity.com/whois/setup.hint > > > > > > BZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT. > > > > > > *Post* the setup.hint file. > > > > > > cgf > > > > > > > ATTACHMENT part 11 message/rfc822 > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 18:09:53 -0500 > From: Christopher Faylor > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: whois package > Reply-to: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 05:26:35PM -0500, Mark > Bradshaw wrote: > >small type correction: > > > >sdesc: "GNU Whois" > >ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to retrieve > >information on domain names, IP addresses, and > more." > >category: Net > >requires: cygwin > > Didn't even notice the typo. > > FWIW, this gets my vote. > > cgf > > ATTACHMENT part 12 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: > Subject: Re: whois package > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:08:31 +1100 > > Ditto. > === > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Faylor" > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 10:09 AM > Subject: Re: whois package > > > > On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 05:26:35PM -0500, Mark > Bradshaw wrote: > > >small type correction: > > > > > >sdesc: "GNU Whois" > > >ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to > retrieve > > >information on domain names, IP addresses, and > more." > > >category: Net > > >requires: cygwin > > > > Didn't even notice the typo. > > > > FWIW, this gets my vote. > > > > cgf > > > > > ATTACHMENT part 13 message/rfc822 > From: "Matthew Smith" > To: > Subject: Re: whois package > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:54:30 -0600 > > I vote "yes" as well. > > cheers, > -Matt > > > >sdesc: "GNU Whois" > > >ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to > retrieve > > >information on domain names, IP addresses, and > more." > > >category: Net > > >requires: cygwin > > > > Didn't even notice the typo. > > > > FWIW, this gets my vote. > > > > cgf > > > > > > ATTACHMENT part 14 message/rfc822 > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 02:15:46 +0100 > From: "Gerrit P. Haase" > Reply-to: "Gerrit P. Haase @ cygwin-apps" > > To: Christopher Faylor > Subject: Re: whois package > > Hallo Christopher, > > Am 2002-01-05 um 00:09 schriebst du: > > >>sdesc: "GNU Whois" > >>ldesc: "A client for the whois directory service. > It allows you to retrieve > >>information on domain names, IP addresses, and > more." > >>category: Net > >>requires: cygwin > > > Didn't even notice the typo. > > > FWIW, this gets my vote. > > It is not stripped: > =================== > $ ll > total 46 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 Siebensc Administ 46642 Dec 13 > 21:42 whois.exe* > > $ strip * > > $ ll > total 24 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 Siebensc Administ 24576 Jan 5 > 02:03 whois.exe* > > The Cygwin Readme isn't included in the source > package: > ======================================================= > $ ls whois-4.5.15-1/ > Makefile as_del_list ip_del_list po/ > whois.1 > Makefile.am config.h make_as_del.pl* > test-whois.pl* whois.c > README data.h make_ip_del.pl* > tld_serv_list whois.h > TODO debian/ make_tld_serv.pl* > whois-4.5.15.patch whois.spec > > > Besides these LITTLE issues I vote pro;) > > > Gerrit > -- > =^..^= > mailto:gp@familiehaase.de > > > ATTACHMENT part 15 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "Gerrit P. Haase @ cygwin-apps" > > Subject: Re: whois package > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 12:12:47 +1100 > > Gerrit, > The decision to include a package is based on the > package, not the > quality of the packaging. > > Once the decision to include is made, then the > package gets examined by > an existing package (for new packagers) and these > issued examined. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 16 message/rfc822 > Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 01:35:45 -0500 > From: Charles Wilson > To: Robert Collins > CC: "Gerrit P. Haase @ cygwin-apps" > > Subject: Re: whois package > > > > Robert Collins wrote: > > > Gerrit, > > The decision to include a package is based on the > package, not the > > quality of the packaging. > > > > Once the decision to include is made, then the > package gets examined by > > an existing package (for new packagers) and these > issued examined. > > > But thanks for taking the time to investigate the > packaging quality, and > for your report. > > --Chuck > > > > ATTACHMENT part 17 message/rfc822 > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 12:36:33 +0100 > From: "Gerrit P. Haase" > Reply-to: "Gerrit P. Haase @ cygwin-apps" > > To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: whois package > > Hallo Robert, > > Am 2002-01-05 um 02:12 schriebst du: > > > Gerrit, > > The decision to include a package is based on the > package, not the > > quality of the packaging. > > > Once the decision to include is made, then the > package gets examined by > > an existing package (for new packagers) and these > issued examined. > > I thought three votes pro are enough, so the > decision was made, I took > a look and examined the package;) > > BTW, I voted pro whois too. > > > Gerrit > -- > =^..^= > mailto:gp@familiehaase.de > > > ATTACHMENT part 18 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "Gerrit P. Haase @ cygwin-apps" > > Subject: Re: whois package > Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 22:01:28 +1100 > > > === > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerrit P. Haase" > > > > I thought three votes pro are enough, so the > decision was made, I took > > a look and examined the package;) > > Ah. I understand. > > > BTW, I voted pro whois too. > > Yes. I had the impression (perhaps wrongly) that you > were associating > the quality-of-packaging with the > acceptance-of-package. I just wanted > it to be clear.... > > The packaging must meet the various criteria to be > uploaded, but I don't > expect potential maintainers to do all the hard work > until the group has > accepted the package itself. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 19 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: > Subject: Re: Restructuring gettext > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 09:55:46 +1100 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Faylor" > > The "professional" installers aren't installing a > number of disparate > packages. > > > > I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that if > I cancel a gcc > installation > > my current binutils setup will still be intact. > > Indeed and agreed. > > The .MSI microsoft installer packages support > complete rollback of > replaced files, registry settings - the lot - if a > failure occurs during > an install. And the Microsoft Installer Service can > be used for > arbitrary packages. > > So the baseline out there is for reliable > cancellations. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 20 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "David A. Cobb" , > > Subject: Re: Restructuring gettext > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:06:41 +1100 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David A. Cobb" > > > I've thought about suggesting the same thing but > the problem with > that > > > scenario is that if you cancel an installation, > then all sorts of > stuff > > > is uninstalled -- which probably isn't what you > expected. > > > > Probably not. But "cancel" at what point in the > process? It's *real* > > hard to program an installation procedure that's > robust in the face of > a > > user clicking the "cancel" button in the middle. > Even the > > "professional" packages are likely to barf. > > It's trivial to design. You treat an install like a > series of > transactions. You make the transactions as small as > you can while > satisfing all the system constraints - dependencies > etc. > > Once we've got per version dependencies and > conflicts, and ordered > package actions (already described in this list) all > we need to do is > make transactions that begin when a _current_ > dependency/conflict is > being affected and finish when the system again has > a consistent set of > dependencies and conflicts. > > Additionally each package install/remove gets > treated as an independent > transaction, to allow detection of in-use files. > > Easy to code? Maybe not. Not too hard either. > Replacing open files? > Sure. Already designed and proof-of-concept shown > for setup.exe. How > many to queue at once? Until there are no in-process > transactions. > > The only restriction this puts on the setup process > is that post install > scripts _must_ be able to be deferred until all the > physical file > copying is complete. > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 21 message/rfc822 > Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 01:28:23 -0500 > From: Charles Wilson > To: "David A. Cobb" > CC: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: Contribution Package Proposal: JASSPA's > MicroEmacs > > David A. Cobb wrote: > > > > > Gee, Chuck, will that also apply to your Cygwin > Utilities page? > > Yep -- except that there's really no need. That > page, for all intents > and purposes, is dead. Okay, it's not entirely dead > yet -- merely > moribund. For a number of reasons: > > 1) Most everything that USED to be there is now in > the official dist > anyway (*** double standard alert...see below ***) > > 2) Of the remaining stuff, only cygipc, > "cygutils(the package)" and the > auto*wrapper packages are "current" -- I'm pretty > sure most of the other > stuff has suffered a lot of bitrot. > > (*** double standard alert ***) why push "my" > packages into the dist, > and not JASSP Emacs? (a) most of "my" packages are > fairly core -- > libraries and such. Do you really want to go to an > external site for > ncurses? zlib? readline? cvs? (b) "my" packages > are all open > source/gnu with no commercial restrictions -- JASSP > Emacs is not. > (Actually, JASSP Emac's status may be changing; this > is perhaps an > outdated objection) But I'm not really arguing > AGAINST including JASSP > Emacs -- I'm just pointing out what will soon be > possible, for JASSP > Emacs AND CygUtils AND Bob's Big Package of > FunNGames and whatnot. > > --Chuck > > > ATTACHMENT part 22 message/rfc822 > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > To: "Cygwin-Apps" > Subject: Success report: Setup.exe on Windows 2000. > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 04:21:36 -0600 > > Did a clean Cygwin install (mainly BASE) on a new > Win2000 machine at work today > with setup.exe built from CVS (as of ~2:00PM). > Everything appeared to install > (from one site, didn't try the multiple) and > subsequently work fine, I think > we're getting really close here. My home machine > here is WhyXP, and Kevin Roth > has reported at least some measure of success on > NT4, so we've got three good > data points, unless I'm forgetting more. Has > anybody tried it on Win9x yet? > Anybody still *have* Win9x ;-)? > > One problem I've been seeing for a while Rob is that > the package descriptions in > the chooser window are only showing up on maybe 25% > of the pagckages, and just > the package names on the rest. The old setup shows > them on all packages. Are > you seeing this too / known problem? > > -- > Gary R. Van Sickle > Brewer. Patriot. > > > ATTACHMENT part 23 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > , > "Cygwin-Apps" > Subject: Re: Success report: Setup.exe on Windows > 2000. > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 21:23:57 +1100 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > > > One problem I've been seeing for a while Rob is > that the package > descriptions in > > the chooser window are only showing up on maybe > 25% of the pagckages, > and just > > the package names on the rest. The old setup > shows them on all > packages. Are > > you seeing this too / known problem? > > Can you name a specific package that doesn't show. > Is it consistent? > (No, never heard of this happening). > > Rob > > > ATTACHMENT part 24 message/rfc822 > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > To: "Cygwin-Apps" > Subject: RE: Success report: Setup.exe on Windows > 2000. > Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 04:40:30 -0600 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com > > [mailto:cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com]On Behalf Of > Robert Collins > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > > > > > One problem I've been seeing for a while Rob is > that the package > > descriptions in > > > the chooser window are only showing up on maybe > 25% of the pagckages, > > and just > > > the package names on the rest. The old setup > shows them on all > > packages. Are > > > you seeing this too / known problem? > > > > Can you name a specific package that doesn't show. > Is it consistent? > > (No, never heard of this happening). > > > > Rob > > Actually now that I take a look, it's much worse > than 25% - more like 5%. > Example: nothing in BASE is showing a description, > ash, bash, cygwin, all the > way down the line. The view doesn't appear to > matter. > > setup.ini's look ok; here's the ash entry: > > " > # This file is automatically generated. If you edit > it, your > # edits will be discarded next time the file is > generated. > # See http://cygwin.com/setup.html for details. > # > setup-timestamp: 1009834202 > setup-version: 2.125.2.10 > > @ ash > sdesc: "A Bourne Shell (/bin/sh) workalike" > category: Base Shells > requires: cygwin > version: 20011018-1 > install: latest/ash/ash-20011018-1.tar.bz2 33819 > source: latest/ash/ash-20011018-1-src.tar.bz2 143186 > > .... > " > > -- > Gary R. Van Sickle > Brewer. Patriot. > > > ATTACHMENT part 25 message/rfc822 > From: "Robert Collins" > > To: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > , > "Cygwin-Apps" > Subject: Re: Success report: Setup.exe on Windows > 2000. > Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 00:23:51 +1100 > > > === > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" > > > Actually now that I take a look, it's much worse > than 25% - more like > 5%. > > Example: nothing in BASE is showing a description, > ash, bash, cygwin, > all the > > way down the line. The view doesn't appear to > matter. > > Right. I can reproduce this. I have a suspicion or > two - leave it to me. > > Rob > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/