Richard Troy wrote on April 14, 2012 12:47 PM
>Did that, though once again I ran into the ole cygwin update /
>installation disaster that is based on the fact that something
>somewhere doesn't download and the installation doesn't complete properly
>and you have to manually figure out what didn't
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 02:48:27PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>On 4/14/2012 1:33 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> You're right that there isn't a way to disable --large-address-aware
>> but, since it's part of the specs, I'm not sure what would take
>> precedence if there was a --disable* option.
>>
>
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:52:46PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:21:25PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
> For testin
On 4/14/2012 1:52 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:21:25PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
For testing purposes, I'd like to build wi
On 4/14/2012 1:33 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:21:25PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
What's the right wa
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:01:57AM -0700, Richard Troy wrote:
>...During an exchange on a completely unrelated topic:
>[most of another rant snipped]
>
>As you want a bug report, I think I saved the logs, so maybe that's still
>possible, though I was under the impression that they got overwritten o
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:21:25PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>>On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
>>>
...During an exchange on a completely unrelated topic:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>
> >> On 4/10/2012 6:15 PM, Richard Troy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >Did that, though once again I ran into the ole cygwin update /
> >installation disaster that is based on the fact that some
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 01:21:25PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
>>> What's the right way to do that? I tried
>>>
>>>LDFLAGS=
Hello, I am using R 2.14.2-1 under cygwin 1.7.12-1 in Windows 7
Professional Service Pack 1.
I am trying to install the knitr 0.4 package under R 2.14.2-1, and the
installation fails while installing the Rcpp 0.9.10 dependency.
The problem seems related to the missing execinfo.h (see code below).
B
On 4/14/2012 12:37 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
What's the right way to do that? I tried
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--no-large-address-aware
and
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--disable-large-address-a
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 09:46:55AM -0700, Richard Troy wrote:
>
>On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>>
>> On 4/10/2012 6:15 PM, Richard Troy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> The orphaned installations represent places where cygwin1.dlls are or were.
>> You want to make sure you clean them up. No r
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:20:53AM +1000, wynfi...@gmail.com wrote:
>With the latest distribution of cygwin, zsh faults with the following
>message.
>
>child_info_fork::abort: unable to remap deltochar.dll to same address as
>parent (00C1) - try running rebaseall
>zsh: fork failed: resourc
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
> For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
> What's the right way to do that? I tried
>
> LDFLAGS=-Wl,--no-large-address-aware
>
> and
>
> LDFLAGS=-Wl,--disable-large-address-aware
>
> but both resulted in "unre
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>
> On 4/10/2012 6:15 PM, Richard Troy wrote:
>
>
>
> The orphaned installations represent places where cygwin1.dlls are or were.
> You want to make sure you clean them up. No reason to leave around orphans
> to trip and fall on.
Done.
> Also, si
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 03:13:54PM +1000, Rurik Christiansen wrote:
>
> Funnily enough there is no bash.bashrc or global profile or such (unlike
> for csh)
You should have /etc/profile and /etc/bash.bashrc.
They are part of base-files. Try 'cygcheck -l base-files'.
If you don't have them in place
P.S. Rebaseall does not help. I've tried that.
>
>
> With the latest distribution of cygwin, zsh faults with the following message.
>
>
> child_info_fork::abort: unable to remap deltochar.dll to same address as
> parent (00C1) - try running rebaseall
> zsh: fork failed: resource tem
With the latest distribution of cygwin, zsh faults with the following message.
child_info_fork::abort: unable to remap deltochar.dll to same address as parent
(00C1) - try running rebaseall
zsh: fork failed: resource temporarily unavailable
Bash continues to run fine, as far as
For testing purposes, I'd like to build without large-address awareness.
What's the right way to do that? I tried
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--no-large-address-aware
and
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--disable-large-address-aware
but both resulted in "unrecognized option" errors from ld.
Ken
--
Problem reports:
19 matches
Mail list logo
