On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:30:33AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> To clarify: I see nothing in any of the chain of messages that you
>> referred to which indicates that this is the same problem. You're
>> asserting that this is the case but not providing any details t
On 9/25/2009 4:53 AM, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
If you want a 'native' 1.7 build, I can write how I do (mainly
configure+make+make install). However, the current method used by Ken
(the Emacs maintainer) should be valid if one remove 'lucid' and uses
'gtk' to obtain a GTK build.
Yes, that works.
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
Could you put your emacs-gtk tarballs somewhere, or if not, at least your
.cygport?
Yaakov,
I still do not use cygport to build Emacs. :-(
In any case, I have a Cygwin-1.5 build here(*) for Emacs-23 with which
the problems I flagged are reproducible (at least by me)
Christopher Faylor wrote:
To clarify: I see nothing in any of the chain of messages that you
referred to which indicates that this is the same problem. You're
asserting that this is the case but not providing any details to
back that statement up.
I *think* (my guess) it is the same problem b
On 24/09/2009 19:39, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
In my case(*), using 20090924 snapshot, it fixes the problem partially:
Emacs hangs on quitting.
Could you put your emacs-gtk tarballs somewhere, or if not, at least
your .cygport?
Yaakov
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 09:30:34PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 02:39:38AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
>>Cesar Strauss wrote:
>>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
If you could test this and confirm that the snapshot fixes the problem I'll
roll a new release. It t
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 02:39:38AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
>Cesar Strauss wrote:
>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> If you could test this and confirm that the snapshot fixes the problem I'll
>>> roll a new release. It turns out to be a pretty serious bug.
>>>
>>> http://cygwin.com/snapshots
Cesar Strauss wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
If you could test this and confirm that the snapshot fixes the problem I'll
roll a new release. It turns out to be a pretty serious bug.
http://cygwin.com/snapshots/
I am not the OP, but I could reproduce the problem, and I confirm it is
fixed
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 06:42:18PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On 21/09/2009 09:48, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> gdb said that the failure was coming from libxcb-1.dll so I rebuilt
>> libxcb-1.dll with debugging information and with a version of
>> libcygwin.a containing debugging symbols.
>
>
On 21/09/2009 09:48, Christopher Faylor wrote:
gdb said that the failure was coming from libxcb-1.dll so I rebuilt
libxcb-1.dll with debugging information and with a version of
libcygwin.a containing debugging symbols.
Wait, did I just hear an argument for split debug packages? :-)
The fix fo
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 05:13:39PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>I can say that any DLL built with cygwin-1.7.0-51 - cygwin-1.7.0-56 is
>>probably suspect. That's 2009-07-13 - 2009-08-13 .
>
>Argh, that's my fault isn't it? Sorry for not figuring out we should
>have done th
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I can say that any DLL built with cygwin-1.7.0-51 - cygwin-1.7.0-56
> is probably suspect. That's 2009-07-13 - 2009-08-13 .
Argh, that's my fault isn't it? Sorry for not figuring out we should have
done this when we first fixed that bug and thanks for putting in th
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 02:51:50AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On 20/09/2009 21:24, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>This should be fixed in the next Cygwin snapshot and, subsequently, in
>>the next release.
>>
>>If you could test this and confirm that the snapshot fixes the problem
>>I'll roll a n
On 20/09/2009 21:24, Christopher Faylor wrote:
This should be fixed in the next Cygwin snapshot and, subsequently, in the
next release.
>
If you could test this and confirm that the snapshot fixes the problem I'll
roll a new release. It turns out to be a pretty serious bug.
For me this fixe
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 04:14:11PM +0200, Fr??d??ric Bron wrote:
I believe it worked fine before (until a few days ago). I updated to
latest cygwin by running setup-1.7.exe.
(Just running setup -> click several next... ??-> finish)
And now if I do
?? ??/bin/gvim
?? ?
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 04:14:11PM +0200, Fr??d??ric Bron wrote:
>>> I believe it worked fine before (until a few days ago). I updated to
>>> latest cygwin by running setup-1.7.exe.
>>> (Just running setup -> click several next... ??-> finish)
>>>
>>> And now if I do
>>>
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 04:14:11PM +0200, Fr??d??ric Bron wrote:
>> I believe it worked fine before (until a few days ago). I updated to
>> latest cygwin by running setup-1.7.exe.
>> (Just running setup -> click several next... ??-> finish)
>>
>> And now if I do
>> ?? ??/bin/gvim
>> ?? ??:!ls
>>
>>
> I believe it worked fine before (until a few days ago). I updated to
> latest cygwin by running setup-1.7.exe.
> (Just running setup -> click several next... -> finish)
>
> And now if I do
> /bin/gvim
> :!ls
>
> I see a message 'Cannot fork' in the gvim window.
> And see
> 2 [main] gvim
18 matches
Mail list logo
