Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Jari Aalto+mail.linux]

* 2003-09-15 Sam Steingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> list.cygwin-apps
* Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >* Igor Pechtchanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-15 11:57:43 -0400]:
| >
| > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Sam Steingold wrote:
| > 
| > > >* Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-13 19:41:02 -0400]:
| > > >
| > > > >this is a misunderstanding.  I am maintaining this package.
| > > > >please do upload it.
| > > >
| > > > Your first act as a maintainer was to ask someone else to maintain
| > > > the package, indicating that you have "quite enough on my plate".
| > > > That does not fill me with confidence.
| > >
| > > what do you want - a marriage contract?
| > > I have been looking for someone to make and maintain CLISP cygwin
| > > package for a year.  now I am doing it myself.  I am still looking for
| > > someone to take over.  so?
| > 
| > I don't see how having a separate maintainer for the Cygwin version of
| > CLISP makes your task any easier.  All the patches will still go to
| > you (as an upstream maintainer), as will most of the bug reports.  If
| > you're the Cygwin maintainer, you won't have to worry about notifying
| > the Cygwin maintainer of new releases, etc.  In fact, you don't even
| > have to maintain a separate set of Cygwin patches (if you include the
| > CYGWIN-PATCHES directory in the main repository).  All in all, if I
| > were an author of a package, I'd choose to maintain it myself...  This
| > is all IMO, of course.
| 
| Let me wander away for a second.
| 
| When people say "consistent interface", they mean different things.
| For Mozilla people this means that Mozilla on Linux, Windows and Mac
| looks exactly the same.  For GNOME people this means that all
| GNOME applications look exactly the same.  Both these consistecies
| cannot be satisfied at the same time, right?
| 
| The same goes for package maintenance.
| 
| As a CLISP maintainer, I want the CLISP build process to be identical
| on all systems.  Indeed it is: on unix and win32/mingw, all it takes
| to configure, build and install is:
| ./configure --install
| 
| Now, cygwin maintainers (like RedHat maintaners, Debian maintaners &c
| &c) want all packages to look the same _to them_.  This is quite
| reasonable, but it puts a certain strain on me: I have to learn all sort
| of new stuff (setup.hint format, CYGWIN-PATCHES, *.spec, debian &c &c).
| 
| This is why I want someone who already maintains a cygwin package and
| who is comfortable with all these requirements to maintain the CLISP
| cygwin package.
| 
| I am lucky that CLISP already has a debian maintainer.
| Now I want a cygwin maintainer too.

I know what you mean, having have to learn the "Cygwin method" in
summer. I now have a automatic tool to build Cygwin Net release
packages quite easily, so I might consider being clisp maintainer.

I'll contact you directly to get us started

Jari

-- 
http://tiny-tools.sourceforge.net/
Swatch @time   http://www.mir.com.my/iTime/itime.htm
   http://www.ryanthiessen.com/swatch/resources.htm
Use Licenses!  http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6225
Which Licence? http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4825
OSI Licences   http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Sam Steingold]

>* Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-15 21:54:41 +0200]:
>
> Sam Steingold wrote:
> 
> >Now, cygwin maintainers (like RedHat maintaners, Debian maintaners &c
> >&c) want all packages to look the same _to them_.  This is quite
> >reasonable, but it puts a certain strain on me: I have to learn all sort
> >of new stuff (setup.hint format, CYGWIN-PATCHES, *.spec, debian &c &c).
> >
> >This is why I want someone who already maintains a cygwin package and
> >who is comfortable with all these requirements to maintain the CLISP
> >cygwin package.
> >
> >I am lucky that CLISP already has a debian maintainer.
> >Now I want a cygwin maintainer too.
> 
> If your *only* concern is in learning how to mantain a cygwin package
> (as simple as it seems to be to me now, it seemed not at the beginning)
> I guess I can propose myself to "proxy-package" it.
great!

> But it would seems like "cheating" to me: the "burden" of a
> cygwin-specific package is having a cygwin-specific README installed
> in the correct directory (/usr/share/doc/Cygwin) and having the
> binaries installed in the correct directory (/usr/bin).  setup.hint is
> a "fake" problem, as once created, is almost never changed.

CLISP build process creates both setup.hint and cygwin README, so the
binary package is created OOTB.

> The *big* part of being a mantainer is, IMHO, trying to solve
> cygwin-specific problems...

CLISP is not likely to have cygwin-specific problems.
That said, it would indeed be nice if someone were doing that.
Right now, it all lands on my plate anyway, so whatever you can take
from it (e.g., making src package) - please have it!

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
  
 
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.

Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Lapo Luchini]

Sam Steingold wrote:

Now, cygwin maintainers (like RedHat maintaners, Debian maintaners &c
&c) want all packages to look the same _to them_.  This is quite
reasonable, but it puts a certain strain on me: I have to learn all sort
of new stuff (setup.hint format, CYGWIN-PATCHES, *.spec, debian &c &c).
This is why I want someone who already maintains a cygwin package and
who is comfortable with all these requirements to maintain the CLISP
cygwin package.
I am lucky that CLISP already has a debian maintainer.
Now I want a cygwin maintainer too.
If your *only* concern is in learning how to mantain a cygwin package 
(as simple as it seems to be to me now, it seemed not at the beginning) 
I guess I can propose myself to "proxy-package" it.
But as I had not time enough yet to deep-test rsync package (which has 
months-long cygwin-specific hang issues) I would never have time to 
correct cygwin-specific problems in CLISP myself, I'm not even an 
assiduous LISP user. (though it's in my "to-do" list, to learn it 
properly, that list is very long...)

So, if you're happy enough with someone that just need to package that 
for you, I guess I can help, but...

But it would seems like "cheating" to me: the "burden" of a 
cygwin-specific package is having a cygwin-specific README installed in 
the correct directory (/usr/share/doc/Cygwin) and having the binaries 
installed in the correct directory (/usr/bin).
setup.hint is a "fake" problem, as once created, is almost never changed.

So, once someone (me, you, whoever) creates the cygwin-specific README 
(basically including only a short description, a "it compiles out of the 
box" notice, and the list of requierd packages and installed files) and 
the setup.hint and your own install tool of choice is configured to 
support cygwin's directory tree (i.e. using /usr/bin insteadof 
/usr/local/bin, which many package use by default) creating a new 
version of the package would be as easy as running a script.

The *big* part of being a mantainer is, IMHO, trying to solve 
cygwin-specific problems... and if you want to do that anyway then 
mantaining the package really comes almost free. Anyway if this seems 
unnatural to you and you really like someone else to mantain your 
package, with the things I said above, I can do that...

I would really like to have maxima on Cygwin 0=)

--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)

Re: [ITP] ploticus-2.11 - new package for review

[Jari Aalto+mail.linux]

* Sun 2003-09-14 Gary Van Sickle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > Here is new package. Please review.
| > /Jari
| > 
| > http://tierra.dyndns.org:81/cygwin/ploticus-2.11-1-src.tar.bz2
| > http://tierra.dyndns.org:81/cygwin/ploticus-2.11-1.tar.bz2
| > 
| > sdesc: "Commadn line driven tool to generates various plots and graphs"
|   ^^^
|   Command
| 
| > ldesc: "Commadn line driven tool to generates various plots and 
| > graphs from dat\
| > a
| 
| > including bar diagrams, distribution histograms, lines, pie charts, 
| > stacked b\
| > ars, scatterplots, grouped bar charts, Correlation, Medians etc"
| ^^
| 
| Probably don't want to break in the middle of words.


Thank you. Now fixed. bz2 files have been updated (including the new
/usr/sharedoc layout).

the homepage of the package is at http://ploticus.sourceforge.net/
in case someone want to take a peek what it can do.

Jari


-- 
http://tiny-tools.sourceforge.net/
Swatch @time   http://www.mir.com.my/iTime/itime.htm
   http://www.ryanthiessen.com/swatch/resources.htm
Use Licenses!  http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6225
Which Licence? http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4825
OSI Licences   http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

Re: [ITP] sgrep-1.99.1 - new package for review

[Jari Aalto+mail.linux]

* Sun 2003-09-14 Joshua Daniel Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 02:19:17AM +0300, Jari Aalto+mail.linux wrote:
| > sgrep project from http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/jjaakkol/sgrep.html has
| > been ported, please review.
| 
| I haven't reviewed, but the docs should now be in /usr/share/doc/ as stated
| at 

Thank you. Now fixed. 

http://tierra.dyndns.org:81/cygwin/sgrep/sgrep-1.92.1-1.tar.bz2
http://tierra.dyndns.org:81/cygwin/sgrep/sgrep-1.92.1-1-src.tar.bz2

Jari

-- 
http://tiny-tools.sourceforge.net/
Swatch @time   http://www.mir.com.my/iTime/itime.htm
   http://www.ryanthiessen.com/swatch/resources.htm
Use Licenses!  http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6225
Which Licence? http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4825
OSI Licences   http://www.opensource.org/licenses/

Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Sam Steingold]

>* Igor Pechtchanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-15 11:57:43 -0400]:
>
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Sam Steingold wrote:
> 
> > >* Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-13 19:41:02 -0400]:
> > >
> > > >this is a misunderstanding.  I am maintaining this package.
> > > >please do upload it.
> > >
> > > Your first act as a maintainer was to ask someone else to maintain
> > > the package, indicating that you have "quite enough on my plate".
> > > That does not fill me with confidence.
> >
> > what do you want - a marriage contract?
> > I have been looking for someone to make and maintain CLISP cygwin
> > package for a year.  now I am doing it myself.  I am still looking for
> > someone to take over.  so?
> 
> I don't see how having a separate maintainer for the Cygwin version of
> CLISP makes your task any easier.  All the patches will still go to
> you (as an upstream maintainer), as will most of the bug reports.  If
> you're the Cygwin maintainer, you won't have to worry about notifying
> the Cygwin maintainer of new releases, etc.  In fact, you don't even
> have to maintain a separate set of Cygwin patches (if you include the
> CYGWIN-PATCHES directory in the main repository).  All in all, if I
> were an author of a package, I'd choose to maintain it myself...  This
> is all IMO, of course.

Let me wander away for a second.

When people say "consistent interface", they mean different things.
For Mozilla people this means that Mozilla on Linux, Windows and Mac
looks exactly the same.  For GNOME people this means that all
GNOME applications look exactly the same.  Both these consistecies
cannot be satisfied at the same time, right?

The same goes for package maintenance.

As a CLISP maintainer, I want the CLISP build process to be identical
on all systems.  Indeed it is: on unix and win32/mingw, all it takes
to configure, build and install is:
./configure --install

Now, cygwin maintainers (like RedHat maintaners, Debian maintaners &c
&c) want all packages to look the same _to them_.  This is quite
reasonable, but it puts a certain strain on me: I have to learn all sort
of new stuff (setup.hint format, CYGWIN-PATCHES, *.spec, debian &c &c).

This is why I want someone who already maintains a cygwin package and
who is comfortable with all these requirements to maintain the CLISP
cygwin package.

I am lucky that CLISP already has a debian maintainer.
Now I want a cygwin maintainer too.

Thanks.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
  
 
History doesn't repeat itself, but historians do repeat each other.

Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Sam Steingold wrote:

> >* Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-13 19:41:02 -0400]:
> >
> > >this is a misunderstanding.  I am maintaining this package.  please do
> > >upload it.
> >
> > Your first act as a maintainer was to ask someone else to maintain the
> > package, indicating that you have "quite enough on my plate".  That
> > does not fill me with confidence.
>
> what do you want - a marriage contract?
> I have been looking for someone to make and maintain CLISP cygwin
> package for a year.  now I am doing it myself.  I am still looking for
> someone to take over.  so?

Sam,

I don't see how having a separate maintainer for the Cygwin version of
CLISP makes your task any easier.  All the patches will still go to you
(as an upstream maintainer), as will most of the bug reports.  If you're
the Cygwin maintainer, you won't have to worry about notifying the Cygwin
maintainer of new releases, etc.  In fact, you don't even have to maintain
a separate set of Cygwin patches (if you include the CYGWIN-PATCHES
directory in the main repository).  All in all, if I were an author of a
package, I'd choose to maintain it myself...  This is all IMO, of course.
Igor
-- 
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
  |\  _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-.  ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'   Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster."  -- Patrick Naughton

Re: Aspell ... (ready?)

[Gareth Pearce]

Doh - i forgot gcc 3.3.1 is 'test' - but indeed - if theres Anyone who wants
to develop with libaspell before gcc test version goes real - i think they
can use the test ... no?

I dont really think that aspell needs to be marked as test because of this.

Gareth

> You haven't marked them as "test" while gcc-3.3.1 isn't canonical yet. It
> won't harm (much) I think, but it might if someone wants to go ahead and
> develop something with libaspell..
>
> rlc

Re: Aspell ... (ready?)

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

FWIW, the dictionary files are now here:
04be855c088559b4682b5495510234fe *aspell-en-0.51.0-1-src.tar.bz2
http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/aspell-en-0.51.0-1-src.tar.bz2
33fad88cd4d517596ebab42d368ba750 *aspell-en-0.51.0-1.tar.bz2
http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/aspell-en-0.51.0-1.tar.bz2

I did not regenerate them (mostly because I haven't installed Gareth's latest
aspell yet). If regeneration is necessary, I'll do it shortly :)

rlc

On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 03:53:38PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> You haven't marked them as "test" while gcc-3.3.1 isn't canonical yet. It
> won't harm (much) I think, but it might if someone wants to go ahead and
> develop something with libaspell..
> 
> rlc
> 
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 10:53:52PM +1000, Gareth Pearce wrote:
> > > > inspired by this hat - I ask ... is there anything stoping us doing the
> > > > coordinated release of the aspell and dictionary this weekend?  I was
> > fairly
> > > > sure that the last available version (which was compiled by rlc not me,
> > but
> > > > otherwise was perfectly normal) didnt recieve any aditional feedback.
> > > >
> > > > Gareth - the not-quite-just-yet owner of the new-but-not-spiffy aspell
> > > > maintainership hat.
> > > Your hat isn't spiffy?
> > > Anyways, AFAIC, Aspell is ready to roll..
> > > I just don't remember whether what I put on my site is still there..
> > > hmm..
> > > [checking]
> > > hmm.. no longer there..
> > > Do you still have them, Gareth, or should I make them available again?
> > 
> > okay - recompiled with gcc 3.3.1 (libaspell is c++ library) - and appearing
> > all nice and functional. (for me at least)
> > 
> > ready for upload?
> > 
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-0.50.3-1-src.tar.bz2
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin.setup.hint
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev.setup.hint
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc.setup.hint
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15.setup.hint
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Gareth
> 
> -- 
> Well, the handwriting is on the floor.
>   -- Joe E. Lewis

-- 
Q:  What do little WASPs want to be when they grow up?
A:  The very best person they can possibly be.

Re: Aspell ... (ready?)

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

You haven't marked them as "test" while gcc-3.3.1 isn't canonical yet. It
won't harm (much) I think, but it might if someone wants to go ahead and
develop something with libaspell..

rlc

On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 10:53:52PM +1000, Gareth Pearce wrote:
> > > inspired by this hat - I ask ... is there anything stoping us doing the
> > > coordinated release of the aspell and dictionary this weekend?  I was
> fairly
> > > sure that the last available version (which was compiled by rlc not me,
> but
> > > otherwise was perfectly normal) didnt recieve any aditional feedback.
> > >
> > > Gareth - the not-quite-just-yet owner of the new-but-not-spiffy aspell
> > > maintainership hat.
> > Your hat isn't spiffy?
> > Anyways, AFAIC, Aspell is ready to roll..
> > I just don't remember whether what I put on my site is still there..
> > hmm..
> > [checking]
> > hmm.. no longer there..
> > Do you still have them, Gareth, or should I make them available again?
> 
> okay - recompiled with gcc 3.3.1 (libaspell is c++ library) - and appearing
> all nice and functional. (for me at least)
> 
> ready for upload?
> 
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-0.50.3-1-src.tar.bz2
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin.setup.hint
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev.setup.hint
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc.setup.hint
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15.setup.hint
> 
> Regards,
> Gareth

-- 
Well, the handwriting is on the floor.
-- Joe E. Lewis

Re: Aspell ... (ready?)

[Gareth Pearce]

> > inspired by this hat - I ask ... is there anything stoping us doing the
> > coordinated release of the aspell and dictionary this weekend?  I was
fairly
> > sure that the last available version (which was compiled by rlc not me,
but
> > otherwise was perfectly normal) didnt recieve any aditional feedback.
> >
> > Gareth - the not-quite-just-yet owner of the new-but-not-spiffy aspell
> > maintainership hat.
> Your hat isn't spiffy?
> Anyways, AFAIC, Aspell is ready to roll..
> I just don't remember whether what I put on my site is still there..
> hmm..
> [checking]
> hmm.. no longer there..
> Do you still have them, Gareth, or should I make them available again?

okay - recompiled with gcc 3.3.1 (libaspell is c++ library) - and appearing
all nice and functional. (for me at least)

ready for upload?

http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-0.50.3-1-src.tar.bz2
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-bin.setup.hint
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-dev.setup.hint
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/aspell-doc.setup.hint
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15-0.50.3-1.tar.bz2
http://www.users.on.net/gpearce/libaspell15.setup.hint

Regards,
Gareth

Re: Aspell ... (ready?)

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 01:24:20AM +1000, Gareth Pearce wrote:
> 
> > -- 
> > 
> >++
> >| BB |  <-- my spiffy new Cygwin Bash Maintainer Hat ;)
> >| AA |
> >| SS |
> >| HH |
> >  +-Cygwin-+
> >   | o  o |
> >   |  ||  |
> >   \ \__/ /
> >\/
> > 
> 
> inspired by this hat - I ask ... is there anything stoping us doing the
> coordinated release of the aspell and dictionary this weekend?  I was fairly
> sure that the last available version (which was compiled by rlc not me, but
> otherwise was perfectly normal) didnt recieve any aditional feedback.
> 
> Gareth - the not-quite-just-yet owner of the new-but-not-spiffy aspell
> maintainership hat.
Your hat isn't spiffy?
Anyways, AFAIC, Aspell is ready to roll.. 
I just don't remember whether what I put on my site is still there..
hmm..
[checking]
hmm.. no longer there..
Do you still have them, Gareth, or should I make them available again?

rlc

-- 

Re: [RFU] bash-2.05b-15

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> I've made a new release of Bash available for upload. This fixes the problem
> recently reported on the Cygwin mailing list using a temporary patch to 
> config.h.in (thanks to Corinna for the pointers).
> 
> Please remove the -14 from the mirrors - prev should remain -13.
> I'll announce it as soon as it's been uploaded.

Uploaded -15 and removed -14.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Red Hat, Inc.

Re: [RFU] bash-2.05b-15

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

Never mind the mail I just sent - it's a Setup error.
(sorry for any confusion)

OTOH: I ran Setup and, while it was downloading Bash, ^D-ed the last Bash 
instance I had running. Apparently, Bash didn't quite get installed as it
was supposed to be (scared the s**t out of me) and disappeared - no bash.exe
anywhere..

Re-installing fixed the problem, but what worries me is that Setup never 
complained about anything..

rlc

On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> I've made a new release of Bash available for upload. This fixes the problem
> recently reported on the Cygwin mailing list using a temporary patch to 
> config.h.in (thanks to Corinna for the pointers).
> 
> Please remove the -14 from the mirrors - prev should remain -13.
> I'll announce it as soon as it's been uploaded.
> 
> rlc
> 
> 557979e303ed971c1cb52d55be487b6a *bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
> http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
> 35f42365aeec1f461919431559344791 *bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2
> http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2
> 
> -- 
> Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?  Who knows?  Who cares?

-- 
If I have to lay an egg for my country, I'll do it.
-- Bob Hope

Re: [RFU] bash-2.05b-15

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

DO NOT UPLOAD THIS YET!
I've just installed it from my mirror, and am having weird problems I didn't
have when I just manually installed it.

I'm investigating it now.

rlc


On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> I've made a new release of Bash available for upload. This fixes the problem
> recently reported on the Cygwin mailing list using a temporary patch to 
> config.h.in (thanks to Corinna for the pointers).
> 
> Please remove the -14 from the mirrors - prev should remain -13.
> I'll announce it as soon as it's been uploaded.
> 
> rlc
> 
> 557979e303ed971c1cb52d55be487b6a *bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
> http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
> 35f42365aeec1f461919431559344791 *bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2
> http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2
> 
> -- 
> Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?  Who knows?  Who cares?

-- 
I am so optimistic about beef prices that I've just leased a pot roast
with an option to buy.

[RFU] bash-2.05b-15

[Ronald Landheer-Cieslak]

I've made a new release of Bash available for upload. This fixes the problem
recently reported on the Cygwin mailing list using a temporary patch to 
config.h.in (thanks to Corinna for the pointers).

Please remove the -14 from the mirrors - prev should remain -13.
I'll announce it as soon as it's been uploaded.

rlc

557979e303ed971c1cb52d55be487b6a *bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15-src.tar.bz2
35f42365aeec1f461919431559344791 *bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2
http://rlc.unsane.co.uk/release/bash/bash-2.05b-15.tar.bz2

-- 
Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?  Who knows?  Who cares?

Re: new package proposal : CLISP

[Lapo Luchini]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

what do you want - a marriage contract?

Well maybe Sam just thinks that being a mantainer means "producing a 
package 12 minutes after the upstream release, solve all and all the 
problems right now, reply to all the mail in zero time..." which being a 
mantainer is *not* IMHO, not to those extremes anyway.
(I'm not trying to correct CGF, just trying to ease Sam's fears.. fears 
that I also had, when I chose to maintain packages)

IMHO beaing *both* the creator and the mantainer greatly simplifies the 
mantainer task as is, in general, a "good" thing.
And if the problem is in the whining I guess Sam'll stop to ask for 
mantainers just ilke I stopped saying aloud my self-complaints about the 
rsync bugs I still didn't solve 0=)

--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)

RE: Strange setup problem. Next button disabled.[Scanned]

[Steve Fairbairn]

Max,

I did follow up to cygwin-apps (at) saying 2.415 did the same...

http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-09/msg00045.html

I have since hacked an installation by taking a copy from another machine
and creating the registry entries manually, so don't know if I can still
reproduce the problem on that machine, but can try it out if you wish.

Steve.

-Original Message-
From: Max Bowsher 
Sent: 15 September 2003 03:35
Subject: Re: Strange setup problem. Next button disabled.[Scanned]

Steve Fairbairn wrote:
>
> When installing as a machine administrator, but normal network user.  From
> local directory (the same network drive), setup does all the md5 checks,
> offers me the package list, allows me to change the
> Default/Install/Reinstall/... settings, but the 'Next' button is
permanently
> disabled and I just can't click on it.

Strange - very strange, even.

Please try the latest (2.415) snapshot - I don't expect it to help, but just
in case.
If you can still reproduce the problem... well, I suppose I could add some
debug MessageBoxes.

Please follow up to cygwin-apps@, since this is clearly a setup.exe issue.

-- 
-- LONG DISCLAIMER --

*** 
This email has originated from Perwill plc (Registration No. 1906964) 
Office registered at: 13A Market Square, Alton, Hampshire, GU34 1UR, UK 
Tel: +44 (0)1420 545000 
Fax: +44 (0)1420 545001 
www.perwill.com 
*** 
Privileged, confidential and/or copyright information may be contained 
in this email, and is only for the use of the intended addressee. 
To copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it in any way if you are not 
the intended recipient or responsible for delivering to him/her is
prohibited.
If you receive this email by mistake, please advise the sender immediately, 
by using the reply facility in your email software.

We may monitor the content of emails sent and received via our network 
for the purposes of ensuring compliance with policies and procedures. 
This message is subject to and does not create or vary any contractual 
relationships between Perwill plc and the recipient. 
*** 
Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the sender and not 
necessarily of Perwill plc.
*** 
This email has been scanned for known viruses using 
McAfee WebShield 4.5 MR1a 
***