Tim Oxley wrote:
> I'm running wamp/cygwin as a testing environment, and php doesn't want
> to recognise any files I create under cygwin (eg vim/touch etc) as they
> don't have the additional permissions (no + at the end of an ls -l
> command) .
>
> For example, a php 'is_file()' returns false on
On Dec 9 21:58, Eric Blake wrote:
> For those who would like help modernize cygwin to the latest POSIX standard,
> POSIX 2008 is now freely available at:
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/bookstore/catalog/c082.htm
Thanks for letting us know.
> which, once you accept a cookie, redirects to:
>
> ht
On Dec 9 14:14, Matt Rice wrote:
> My understanding was that when I ran setup.exe, new files would have
> my primary group (the way I had it set up in /etc/passwd). I was eager
> to try it out since the current stable version of setup.exe
> (v2.573.2.3) would always use "users" as the group. Howe
> A R Burgers writes:
> LS,
> Today I noticed that I could not run the gs.exe from 8.63.
> gs.exe --version says it is 8.62, hence it can't work with the 8.63 files
> in /usr/share/ghostscript/8.63.
11:14 AM [500]> cygcheck -cd | grep ghostscript
ghostscript
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Corinna Vinschen on 12/10/2008 2:34 AM:
> Do you know, by any chance, how I can get the Mozilla search feature to
> work with SUSv4?
I think the web pages are still a work in progress:
https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mail.tpl?CAL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The following packages have been updated in the Cygwin net release:
*** libxml2-2.7.2-1
*** libxml2-devel-2.7.2-1
*** libxml2-doc-2.7.2-1
*** python-libxml2-2.7.2-1
This is the latest upstream version, with a patch for CVE-2008-4225/6.
Yaakov
D
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The following packages have been updated in the Cygwin net release:
*** esound-0.2.41-1
*** libesd0-0.2.41-1
*** libesd-devel-0.2.41-1
This is an upstream version bump; see NEWS for changes. The library
packages have been renamed, and will upgrade
Hi all,
after a rather long period of time of development, we're proud to start
public testing of the upcoming new major release of Cygwin. The version
number is 1.7.0 for the current test release and will be 1.7.x with some
x yet to be chosen for the final release. As of today, the planning is
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 9 14:14, Matt Rice wrote:
My understanding was that when I ran setup.exe, new files would have
my primary group (the way I had it set up in /etc/passwd). I was eager
to try it out since the current stable version of setup.exe
(v2.573.2.3) would always use "users"
The historical reasons for merging the cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists no
longer seems to exist so I am contemplating merging the two lists.
If anyone has a compelling reason why this should not happen please send
it to one of the two lists. If I don't hear a coherent argument against
doing this, I
I remember that in past versions of Windows, 'cmd.exe' imposed a
draconianly short command line on Cygwin console. I was wondering
whether the limitation applied to Xterm windows, as well. I have become
quite adept at using xargs to avoid this limit. However, I was writing
something about Cygwi
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> The historical reasons for merging the cygwin and cygwin-xfree lists no
> longer seems to exist so I am contemplating merging the two lists.
>
> If anyone has a compelling reason why this should not happen please send
> it to one of the two lists. If I don't hear a cohe
Corinna,
I just want to take second to thank you for all the work you've done on
Cygwin. Cygwin has kept me sane in Windows environments for ?? years
now, and I can only guess at the amount of time you've spent on it.
It's a great tool and I really appreciate it.
thanks,
Colin Ingarfield
Au
>
> I don't mind the traffic of xfree, but the cygwin list has too much
traffic.
There IS traffic on xfree? Looks this has escaped me then. :P
-a
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: ht
I applaud the change!
And while some hippos may not be sanguine, Elephant\Rhinos (Elifinos!,
as in, 'El-if-i-no which list to send it to') are ecstatic!
;-)
Lee
sowiso wrote:
I don't mind the traffic of xfree, but the cygwin list has too much
traffic.
There IS traffic on xfree? Looks
Will Parsons wrote:
> You may not consider it a compelling argument, but I find the traffic on
> the cygwin list more than enough already, and am glad I don't have to
> bother about the cygwin-xfree traffic. I'd prefer to keep things as
> is.
But on xfree, there IS NO traffic!
Just check the arch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Andreas Eibach wrote:
> But on xfree, there IS NO traffic!
>
> This is ridiculously few compared to 2 years ago when Harold L Hunt put
> more work into this _per week_ than all people together summed up from
> summer to end of this year!
That may ha
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 11:47:51AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 04:51:29PM +0100, Matthias Meyer wrote:
>>>:-) Yes it works!
>>>
>>>Three important things are going wrong in "my" past:
>>>1. /etc/passwd as well as /etc/group are necessary i
On Windows XP running Cygwin, I'm trying to run the following file
through protoize (3.4.4 (cygming special, gdc 0.12, using dmd 0.125)):
C:\foo>type foo.c
void foo ()
{
}
C:\foo>protoize -k foo.c
protoize: compiling `/cygdrive/c/foo/foo.c'
protoize: /c/cygdrive/c/foo/foo.c: can't get status:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
after a rather long period of time of development,
Is this going to change for the next major release? There's an awful
lot to absorb in this one.
- No more support for Windows 95/98/Me.
Awesome.
Can you talk about the positive consequences? Obviously there's
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 05:41:38PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> after a rather long period of time of development,
>
> Is this going to change for the next major release? There's an awful lot
> to absorb in this one.
If you mean for 1.9.x then there is no way to predi
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 05:41:38PM -0700, Warren Young wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
after a rather long period of time of development,
Is this going to change for the next major release? There's an awful lot
to absorb in this one.
If you mean for 1.9.x then there
NOTE: Resending below message once. It got flagged as html the first
time around. Not sure if it made it though as it wasn't archived yet.
While setting up sshd using ssh-host-config it produces a script error
when working with the mount command but still continued to process
through to completi
I forgot to mention the cygwin version so here is the whole setup as needed.
$ uname -a
CYGWIN_NT-5.1 Shinji-Winxp 1.7.0(0.189/5/3) 2008-12-09 14:20 i686 Cygwin
I also attached a cygcheck.out file.
--
Robert Pendell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"A perfect world is one of chaos."
Thawte Web of Trust Nota
While running cron-config I chose to run as a privileged user. Here
is the output from the script.
$ cron-config
Do you want to install the cron daemon as a service? (yes/no) yes
Enter the value of CYGWIN for the daemon: [ntsec smbntsec] ntsec smbntsec
The service can run either as yourself or u
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> Can you talk about the positive consequences? Obviously there's a lot of
> backwards compatibility stuff you can now ignore, and undoubtedly a lot of
> compatibility code that you were able to remove. I see some features in the
> following li
Matt Wozniski wrote:
to have a list of what we get for being able to drop this cursed loadstone.
^^^
I lol'ed at the reference
Glad someone got it. :)
Why don't you run
27 matches
Mail list logo
