From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3801 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2010 17:51:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 3793 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Oct 2010 17:51:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TW_YG,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (HELO mail.gmx.net) (213.165.64.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:51:39 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Oct 2010 17:51:34 -0000 Received: from p4FC18C01.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO detlef.gmx.de) [79.193.140.1] by mail.gmx.net (mp027) with SMTP; 06 Oct 2010 19:51:34 +0200 From: Michael Albinus To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: emacs-23.2-3 and DBus References: <844od1b8rx.fsf@aol.com> <4CAB2230.4090500@cornell.edu> <877hhwiih3.fsf@gmx.de> <4CAB84CF.2010604@cornell.edu> <8739skhs26.fsf@gmx.de> <4CAC73AF.1020209@cornell.edu> <87ocb7mlhq.fsf@gmx.de> <4CACB32F.2070501@cornell.edu> Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:51:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4CACB32F.2070501@cornell.edu> (Ken Brown's message of "Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:34:39 -0400") Message-ID: <87y6abgqg3.fsf@gmx.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00146.txt.bz2 Ken Brown writes: >> The binary has the following checksum: >> >> $ cksum /usr/bin/emacs >> 658187514 16254990 /usr/bin/emacs > > That's not actually the binary; it's a symlink that resolves to either > /usr/bin/emacs-X11.exe or /usr/bin/emacs-nox.exe, depending on whether > or not you've installed the emacs-X11 package. Is it possible that > you upgraded the emacs package but are still using an old emacs-X11? > If not, I don't know what the problem could be. If you can't figure > it out, you could try giving the command > > cygcheck -svr > cygcheck.out > > and sending the resulting cygcheck.out as an attachment. Maybe I (or > someone) will be able to spot something. I haven't the cygwin notebook with me, next access for me is tomorrow. I'll check then. The only difference I could imagine is that I haven't started the system bus; only the session bus was running. Could you, please, check with your environment? Maybe there is still a problem. > Ken Best regards, Michael. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple