Lars Bjørndal wrote:
snip
Anyway, today I found a hacked version of setup.exe which allowed a
command line parameter '-p package list', which was very useful.
And that's why the new setup supports complete operation by
the command line. Note that it still throws up the dialogs
on the screen
Lars Bjørndal wrote:
Anyway, today I found a hacked version of setup.exe which allowed a
command line parameter '-p package list', which was very useful. I found
the hacked verison here:
http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~mr349/setup.exe
and the patch for it is here:
On Mar 3 15:03, Dave Korn wrote:
Gang, we keep getting asked for this, and as long as we're going to keep a
legacy 1.5 distro hanging around for people to use, shouldn't we ought to
backport the patch to the branch? I'm kinda busy right now with binutils and
gcc, and not likely to have
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:03, Dave Korn wrote:
Gang, we keep getting asked for this, and as long as we're going to keep a
legacy 1.5 distro hanging around for people to use, shouldn't we ought to
backport the patch to the branch? I'm kinda busy right now with binutils and
gcc,
On Mar 3 15:36, Dave Korn wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:03, Dave Korn wrote:
Gang, we keep getting asked for this, and as long as we're going to keep
a
legacy 1.5 distro hanging around for people to use, shouldn't we ought to
backport the patch to the branch? I'm
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:02:16PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:36, Dave Korn wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:03, Dave Korn wrote:
Gang, we keep getting asked for this, and as long as we're going to
keep a
legacy 1.5 distro hanging around for people to use,
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 05:02:16PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:36, Dave Korn wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 3 15:03, Dave Korn wrote:
Gang, we keep getting asked for this, and as long as we're going to
keep a
legacy 1.5 distro hanging
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I thought we were planning on keeping it around more-or-less indefinitely
for the benefit of 9x users?
Uh, well, yes. Never mind. If somebody wants to invest the time,
feel free.
Quick show of hands - how many people are still using 9x?
Anyone? ... Buehler?
On Mar 3 11:49, Ralph Hempel wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I thought we were planning on keeping it around more-or-less indefinitely
for the benefit of 9x users?
Uh, well, yes. Never mind. If somebody wants to invest the time,
feel free.
Quick show of hands - how many people are
Ralph Hempel wrote on Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:49 AM:
Quick show of hands - how many people are still using 9x?
I stall have 98se on my home machine, but I almost never use cygwin on it. I
can live without cygwin on it, and I can handle a gui.
Perhaps the real question is the number of
Ralph Hempel wrote:
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I thought we were planning on keeping it around more-or-less
indefinitely
for the benefit of 9x users?
Uh, well, yes. Never mind. If somebody wants to invest the time,
feel free.
Quick show of hands - how many people are still using 9x?
11 matches
Mail list logo
