On Aug 12 19:09, Ralph Hempel wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
>> It works for me(TM), so I don't know what I screwed up. But at least
>> we have finally a version of setup which can be used by all package
>> maintainers.
>> If nobody beats me to it, I'll upload this version as setup-1.7.exe to
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
It works for me(TM), so I don't know what I screwed up. But at least
we have finally a version of setup which can be used by all package
maintainers.
If nobody beats me to it, I'll upload this version as setup-1.7.exe to
http://cygwin.com tomorrow.
Glad to see you've
On Aug 12 16:25, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:02:15PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Aug 12 17:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>Is it worth it at all? Isn't it sufficient to keep the 1.5 installer
> >>on the branch and use it for 9x installations in future only?
> >
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 08:02:15PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Aug 12 17:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>Is it worth it at all? Isn't it sufficient to keep the 1.5 installer
>>on the branch and use it for 9x installations in future only?
>
>Never mind. Baring any dumb mistakes, it's apparent
On Aug 12 17:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> And the next question.
>
> I have hacked up a version of setup which handles most of the stuff
> necessary to install Cygwin 1.7 now. However, it contains changes which
> are hard to implemented transparently on 9x. For instance, all local
> file access
And the next question.
I have hacked up a version of setup which handles most of the stuff
necessary to install Cygwin 1.7 now. However, it contains changes which
are hard to implemented transparently on 9x. For instance, all local
file access is now using wide char functions which are usually n
