Please keep replies on-list.
And? Your points below don't give any rational that means NASM is good
or bad to include. There are lots of things that only a few folk use in
cygwin already - i.e. robots.
Other things also build smoothly - ie squid, grep, ls, sh-utils, bash,
to name a few. So
--- Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please keep replies on-list.
sorry, sometimes mail comes with the list address in From:,
but not this time...
And? Your points below don't give any rational that means NASM is good
or bad to include. There are lots of things that only a few
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote:
Did someone think of developing a simple framework for making the packages,
especially for that software which supports Cygwin and configure does everything
for you?
Concurrent Version Systems has an autobuild package. I haven't looked
at it yet, just found it
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote:
As for the packaging, the most annoing thing (only imho, I've built only
one package, much less than you folks) was setting correctly all
the path names in configure options, and then packing it all with a proper
file name.
Did someone think of developing a simple
Ok, gang,
I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
the pieces defined in the contributor's document. It is now
ready for upload.
--
Prentis Brooks | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 703-265-0914 | AIM: PrentisBrooks
Senior System Administrator - Web
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 11:53:58PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
Please keep replies on-list.
And? Your points below don't give any rational that means NASM is good
or bad to include. There are lots of things that only a few folk use in
cygwin already - i.e. robots.
Other things also build
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:09:57AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
Ok, gang,
I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
the pieces defined in the contributor's document. It is now
ready for upload.
Can you repost the setup.hint? Chuck made some
Stanislav Sinyagin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did someone think of developing a simple framework for making the
packages, especially for that software which supports Cygwin and
configure does everything for you?
Not a simple script, but I've built a cardhouse of scripts that setup
a
Not a problem, here it is:
# TCP Wrappers
sdesc: TCP Wrappers, Tool to provide host based access restrictions in
tcp services
ldesc: TCP Wrappers, With this package you can monitor and filter
incoming
requests for the SYSTAT, FINGER, FTP, TELNET, RLOGIN, RSH, EXEC, TFTP,
TALK,
and other network
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:09:57AM -0500, Prentis Brooks wrote:
Ok, gang,
I finally got the time to finish up the build so that I had all
the pieces defined in the contributor's document. It is now
ready for upload.
Can you
I was having some problems uploading to my website, but the script is now
available in http://home.ix.netcom.com/~mchase/zip/clean_lst.zip .
I added a wrapper script to make it easier to use. It works fine for me,
but someone else should try it before we unleash it on the general public.
--
Mac
Hallo Lapo,
Am 2002-03-20 um 14:42 schriebst du:
As for NASM, I've seen only one program which uses it (and can compile
without it too) -- that's Lame. Are there more? Perhaps, some hardware
related tools, like CD-R burning? Video processing?
At least UCL/UPX which is to be packaged
Hallo Jim,
Am 2002-03-19 um 16:47 schriebst du:
I kinda thought the people at nasm.2y.net were doing a good job of
maintaining it
A Cygwin maintainer is one who cares about inclusion of a package in
the Cygwin dist. I don't find a Cygwin binary at this site, but thank
you anyway since I
Prentis Brooks wrote:
Hmm. I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make the wrapper library a
DLL.
I would rather we didn't, primarily because the modification to make tcp
wrappers work with Cygwin was simplistic. In fact, at this point the
modification is only to the Makefile, plus a
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:33PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
(In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes
to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this,
__declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no longer.) With auto-import
binutils, and the
Hrmmm I will look into it, I am sure there is some efficiency gained
from making it a DLL. Would packages that are built against libwrap
automatically use the DLL if it is available, or would they need to be
tweaked as well (ie sshd is compiled such that if libwrap.a is available
it will use
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:33PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
(In the old days, making a DLL required intrusive and exhausting changes
to lots and lots of source files -- __declspec(dllexport) this,
__declspec(dllexport that)... -- but no
I had the opportunity to install cygwin from scratch today and
decided to do a mad clicker install and see how far I could get with
that without adding any of my personal favorites (vim, ssh, etc.)
The only two things I really missed were a pager and an editor. You
*can* use the Windows more,
Prentis Brooks wrote:
Hrmmm I will look into it, I am sure there is some efficiency gained
from making it a DLL. Would packages that are built against libwrap
automatically use the DLL if it is available, or would they need to be
tweaked as well (ie sshd is compiled such that if
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 10:29:34PM -0600, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
And what the heck happened to my big white box?!?!? ;-)
I think I happened to it. I kept promising some art work but I could
never get my son to finish it.
It's basically a cygwin C with an otter lounging on the bottom. The C
Is anyone investigating the problem with /usr/lib/w32api problem in
setup.exe?
w32api is being created in c:/cygwin/usr/lib/w32api rather than
c:/cygwin/lib/w32api .
cgf
I'd like to remove 'diff' in favor of a new 'diffutils'?
Is there any way to do that without causing problems? Is
there anything new in setup.exe that would eliminate the
dreaded libncurses problem?
cgf
I will check this tonight.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 5:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: /usr/lib/w32api problem in setup.exe needs immediate
investigation
Is anyone investigating the problem
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Any way to uninstall in new setup.exe?
I'd like to remove 'diff' in favor of a new 'diffutils'?
Is there any way to do that without
-Original Message-
From: Joshua Daniel Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:12 PM
1. Can the less package be put into base? It really does
seem essential.
No. But man should depend on less IMO. And that will suck less in
automatically.
ROb
Rob,
Alright if I start on bringing the chooser window into the wizard as another
page, now that the new version is out? Hopefully it won't be too big of a deal.
And what the heck happened to my big white box?!?!? ;-)
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
Brewer. Patriot.
26 matches
Mail list logo
