On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:15 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
+ // Remove anything which we just tried to run (so we don't try
twice)
+ for (i = packages.begin (); i != packages.end (); ++i)
+{
+ packagemeta pkg = **i;
+ for (std::vectorScript::const_iterator j =
On 07/09/2010 10:45, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:15 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
+ // Remove anything which we just tried to run (so we don't try
twice)
+ for (i = packages.begin (); i != packages.end (); ++i)
+{
+ packagemeta pkg = **i;
+ for
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 15:01 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 07/09/2010 10:45, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
This code does not compile with i686-pc-mingw32 gcc-4.5.1:
postinstall.cc: In function ‘std::string
do_postinstall_thread(HINSTANCE__*, HWND__*)’:
postinstall.cc:178:85: error: no matching
On 07/09/2010 17:57, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 15:01 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 07/09/2010 10:45, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
This code does not compile with i686-pc-mingw32 gcc-4.5.1:
postinstall.cc: In function ‘std::string
do_postinstall_thread(HINSTANCE__*, HWND__*)’:
On 28/08/2010 17:40, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 01:30:54PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 27/08/2010 19:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 29/07/2010 17:28, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor
On 27/08/2010 19:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 29/07/2010 17:28, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 01:30:54PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 27/08/2010 19:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 29/07/2010 17:28, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100,
On 29/07/2010 17:28, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more than I
wanted to. It adds a new page, which is displayed if any script
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 29/07/2010 17:28, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more
than I
wanted
On 13 August 2010 12:29, Andy Koppe andy.ko...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 August 2010 20:42, Christopher Faylor wrote:
@@ -433,7 +433,9 @@
ICON IDI_CYGWIN,IDC_HEADICON,SETUP_HEADICON_X,0,21,20
LTEXT Postinstall script errors,IDC_STATIC_HEADER_TITLE
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:14:54PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
So here's another take at the patch, amended as suggested by Corinna.
It now also tweaks the bottom coordinate of the results text box,
because I found it ran into the line above the Back/Next/Cancel
buttons.
Ship it!
cgf
On Aug 12 15:42, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 08:31:24PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
On 12 August 2010 19:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Index: res.rc
===
RCS file: /cvs/cygwin-apps/setup/res.rc,v
retrieving
On 12 August 2010 20:42, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 08:31:24PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
On 12 August 2010 19:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Index: res.rc
===
RCS file: /cvs/cygwin-apps/setup/res.rc,v
retrieving
On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
On 23 July 2010 18:45, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Here's a small patch for setup.exe which causes setup to indicate if a
postinstall script didn't run successfully.
This should help avoid the situation where the postinstall scripts fail to
run and the user has a
On Aug 12 11:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
Shall we tone down the error box here a little bit? A postinstall
failure in some obscure package that might only have been installed
due to the user selecting 'All' won't actually impact on the use of
Cygwin. I think
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:26:33PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 12 11:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
Shall we tone down the error box here a little bit? A postinstall
failure in some obscure package that might only have been installed
due to the user
On 12 August 2010 15:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:26:33PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 12 11:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
Shall we tone down the error box here a little bit? A postinstall
failure in some obscure package that
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 06:53:47PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
On 12 August 2010 15:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:26:33PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 12 11:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 12/08/2010 06:44, Andy Koppe wrote:
Shall we tone down the error box here a
On 12 August 2010 19:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I think that wording will still cause consternation.
Maybe we need something like:
This does not necessarily mean that the affected package will fail to
function properly but if you do notice problems please check
/var/log/setup.log.full .
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 08:31:24PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
On 12 August 2010 19:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
Index: res.rc
===
RCS file: /cvs/cygwin-apps/setup/res.rc,v
retrieving revision 2.88
diff -u -r2.88 res.rc
--- res.rc
On 23 July 2010 18:45, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Here's a small patch for setup.exe which causes setup to indicate if a
postinstall script didn't run successfully.
This should help avoid the situation where the postinstall scripts fail to
run and the user has a broken installation, but they don't
Hi,
Could I get a gold star for this change? It fixes a longstanding annoyance.
Also, one each for Jon and Andy for fixing other problems.
Thanks.
cgf
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 08:19:20PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
On 30/07/2010 15:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
errors page. The only two
Could I get a gold star for this change? It fixes a longstanding annoyance.
Also, one each for Jon and Andy for fixing other problems.
All three awarded.
On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 04:54:24PM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
Could I get a gold star for this change? It fixes a longstanding annoyance.
Also, one each for Jon and Andy for fixing other problems.
All three awarded.
Thanks Andrew.
cgf
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more
than I
wanted to. It adds a new page, which is
On 30/07/2010 15:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
errors page. The only two packages that should have been installed
were
gcc: C compiler upgrade helper
glib: Gnome C function library (1.2 sources)
(both of which are selected due to a setup.exe bug)
I finally got bored of this one.
On 30/07/2010 15:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more than I
On 30/07/2010 20:19, Dave Korn wrote:
I finally got bored of this one. Turned out to be trivially easy to fix
once I looked at it, it's simply an early exit from the install routine when
there's nothing to do for a dummy tarball (zero or 46-byte size) that misses
out on marking the package
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 08:19:20PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
On 30/07/2010 15:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
errors page. The only two packages that should have been installed
were
gcc: C compiler upgrade helper
glib: Gnome C function library (1.2 sources)
(both of which are selected due
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 04:44:24PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 08:19:20PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
On 30/07/2010 15:37, Christopher Faylor wrote:
errors page. The only two packages that should have been installed
were
gcc: C compiler upgrade helper
glib: Gnome C
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more than I
wanted to. It adds a new page, which is displayed if any script failed, and
reports which packages and
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 28/07/2010 15:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 03:25:17PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Anyhow, here's another attempt, which unfortunately changes rather more
than I
wanted to. It adds a new page, which is
On 29 July 2010 20:39, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
I'm grateful that you and Andy have decided to take over
setup.exe maintainership. I have a whole bunch of enhancement requests for
you.
Nice try, but no, Jon can have it all to
On 23/07/2010 19:49, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:45:47PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Here's a small patch for setup.exe which causes setup to indicate if a
postinstall script didn't run successfully.
This should help avoid the situation where the postinstall scripts fail
Here's a small patch for setup.exe which causes setup to indicate if a
postinstall script didn't run successfully.
This should help avoid the situation where the postinstall scripts fail to run
and the user has a broken installation, but they don't notice until they try
to run something
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:45:47PM +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Here's a small patch for setup.exe which causes setup to indicate if a
postinstall script didn't run successfully.
This should help avoid the situation where the postinstall scripts fail to run
and the user has a broken installation,
36 matches
Mail list logo
