RE: License question (Distribution of cygwin1.dll

patrick schmidt sent the following at Monday, May 07, 2018 10:28 AM > >I want to use iPerf3.exe in an commercial projekt. iPerf uses the MIT >License but needs cygwin1.dll in order to function correctly. > >I need to distribute iperf3.exe in our commercial software, but we cant >release the source

License question (Distribution of cygwin1.dll

Hello dear Cygwin community, I want to use iPerf3.exe in an commercial projekt. iPerf uses the MIT License but needs cygwin1.dll in order to function correctly. I need to distribute iperf3.exe in our commercial software, but we cant release the source code of this product. We do not modify cygwin

OpenLDAP - Upgrade distribution to 2.4.39

Hello Cygwin Community, Are there plans to upgrade OpenLDAP to 2.4.39? 2.4.35 has lots of bugs that's been resolved in 2.4.39, and the OpenLDAP group recommends everyone using OpenLDAP to upgrade to the latest version before 2.5 is officially released. Regards, Auteria Winzer Jr. -- Problem

Re: OpenSSH Package Distribution Architecture Mismatch

On 4/11/2014 5:49 PM, Auteria W. Winzer Jr. wrote: I noticed an anomaly within both 32bit and 64bit distributions of OpenSSH. The package maintainer inadvertently placed the architectures in their opposition. At 1st glance I thought I had clicked the wrong icon thinking I was using 64bit within

OpenSSH Package Distribution Architecture Mismatch

I noticed an anomaly within both 32bit and 64bit distributions of OpenSSH. The package maintainer inadvertently placed the architectures in their opposition. At 1st glance I thought I had clicked the wrong icon thinking I was using 64bit within 32bit's space, and vice-versa. The latest OpenSSH

[Packaging error] autobuild-5.3-1: Included emacs lisp files shadow newer ones from the emacs distribution

Hi Charles The following outdated files from autobuild-5.3-1 shadow newer ones from the emacs distribution: /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/htmlfontify hides /usr/share/emacs/23.4/lisp/htmlfontify /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/hfy-cmap hides /usr/share/emacs/23.4/lisp/hfy-cmap Please repackage

stripping/relocating cygwin distribution

Hello, I use heavily stripped cygwin distribution, basically limited to selected executables, libraries, and supporting files. It works pretty well, but I am facing a strange problem on Windows 7. It can be very easily reproduced as following: 1) from cygwin shell, make a copy of c:\cygwin (here

Re: Binary distribution and DLLs

On 11/02/2009 10:10 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote: Link 1: download with source (250MB) Link 2: download without source (12MB) Installing from link2: Installer asks, would you like to download the source? 'setup.exe' does not have a mechanism for such a question if that's what you're asking. From t

Re: Binary distribution and DLLs

On Nov 2 15:59, Jon Beniston wrote: > > Binary distribution? You are aware that linking an > > application against the Cygwin DLL requires to put your > > application under a compatible Open Source license, aren't > > you? See http://cygwin.com/license.html >

RE: Binary distribution and DLLs

> Binary distribution? You are aware that linking an > application against the Cygwin DLL requires to put your > application under a compatible Open Source license, aren't > you? See http://cygwin.com/license.html Yes, it already is GPLed and the source will be included. Ho

RE: Binary distribution and DLLs

> -Original Message- > From: Corinna Vinschen > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 9:58 > Subject: Re: Binary distribution and DLLs > > On Nov 2 09:46, Jason Pyeron wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Corinna Vinschen > &

Re: Binary distribution and DLLs

On Nov 2 09:46, Jason Pyeron wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Corinna Vinschen > > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 7:38 > > Subject: Re: Binary distribution and DLLs > > > > On Oct 31 15:08, Jon Beniston wrote: > > > Hi, > > &

RE: Binary distribution and DLLs

> -Original Message- > From: Corinna Vinschen > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 7:38 > Subject: Re: Binary distribution and DLLs > > On Oct 31 15:08, Jon Beniston wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I want to distribute a binary build of some software tha

Re: Binary distribution and DLLs

> on. Binary distribution? You are aware that linking an application against the Cygwin DLL requires to put your application under a compatible Open Source license, aren't you? See http://cygwin.com/license.html Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygw

Binary distribution and DLLs

Hi, I want to distribute a binary build of some software that I have written, part of which includes some programs that are linked with cygwin1.dll and other Cygwin dlls such as cygexpat-1.dll, cyggmp-3.dll, cygintl-8.dll and so on. Due to some of the other Windows specific components of the sof

RE: Source distribution problem with core library

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 1:34 PM > To: cygwin@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: Source distribution problem with core library > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008

Re: Source distribution problem with core library

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:39:19PM -0400, Don Porges wrote: >I think that the installable source tar.gz file of cygwin-1.5.25-15 is >not what it's supposed to be. > >I installed the latest (non-cvs) source using setup.exe, which got me >cygwin-1.5.25-15-src.tar.bz2. The specific source file that

Source distribution problem with core library

I think that the installable source tar.gz file of cygwin-1.5.25-15 is not what it's supposed to be. I installed the latest (non-cvs) source using setup.exe, which got me cygwin-1.5.25-15-src.tar.bz2. The specific source file that I care about right now is winsup/cygwin/path.cc. By comparing i

Re: Distribution of cygwin (free and commercial)

2008/4/11, Hans Kaiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I have read the "FAQ suggestion", and I wanted to open a new thread about > the possible distribution of cygwin. (I cannot access the old thread) > > Before I start, I want you to check what happened to Eclipse, KD

Re: Distribution of cygwin (free and commercial)

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 07:20:47PM +0200, Hans Kaiser wrote: >Hello all, > >I have read the "FAQ suggestion", and I wanted to open a new thread about >the possible distribution of cygwin. (I cannot access the old thread) > >Before I start, I want you to check what hap

Re: Distribution of cygwin (free and commercial)

Hans Kaiser wrote: Hello all, I have read the "FAQ suggestion", and I wanted to open a new thread about the possible distribution of cygwin. (I cannot access the old thread) Before I start, I want you to check what happened to Eclipse, KDE, Gnome, 7-zip and so on. Really many, many

Re: Distribution of cygwin (free and commercial)

> Hello all, > > I have read the "FAQ suggestion", and I wanted to open a new thread about > the possible distribution of cygwin. (I cannot access the old thread) > > Before I start, I want you to check what happened to Eclipse, KDE, Gnome, > 7-zip and so on. Rea

Distribution of cygwin (free and commercial)

Hello all, I have read the "FAQ suggestion", and I wanted to open a new thread about the possible distribution of cygwin. (I cannot access the old thread) Before I start, I want you to check what happened to Eclipse, KDE, Gnome, 7-zip and so on. Really many, many people are using th

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

Hi Thank you for your reply. This is due to miscommuication. Previously I have alredy reported by other title. Please see, http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2008-02/msg00228.html However, Goldschmidt, Yadin Y gave me a solution. It has been solved. Many thanks to the cygwin community. Regards T

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

Rodrigo Medina wrote: Hi, Unlike the distributions of all other packages the distribution of grace does not put the executable program in one of the standard directories /bin or /usr/X11R6/bin. Instead it puts xmgrace.exe inside /usr/share/grace/bin. In /bin there are only links pointing to

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

Don't send my private email regarding this topic, I am subscribed to the cygwin list. Tatsuro MATSUOKA wrote: Hello --- Volker Quetschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The grace have not been executed on my computer. Are there people who tried to work the grace on thier computers? Yes, works fine

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

Hello --- Volker Quetschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The grace have not been executed on my computer. > > Are there people who tried to work the grace on thier computers? > > Yes, works fine here. Hmmm! Then why cannot I execute grace on my computers (in Univ. and Home)? I hope that the gr

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

puter who are installed the cygwin. Regrads Tatsuro --- Rodrigo Medina wrote: Hi, Unlike the distributions of all other packages the distribution of grace does not put the executable program in one of the standard directories /bin or /usr/X11R6/bin. Instead it puts xmgrace.exe inside

Re: Grace distribution is not standard

tsuro --- Rodrigo Medina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > Unlike the distributions of all other packages the distribution > of grace does not put the executable program in one of the standard > directories /bin or /usr/X11R6/bin. Instead it puts xmgrace.exe inside > /usr/shar

Grace distribution is not standard

Hi, Unlike the distributions of all other packages the distribution of grace does not put the executable program in one of the standard directories /bin or /usr/X11R6/bin. Instead it puts xmgrace.exe inside /usr/share/grace/bin. In /bin there are only links pointing to the actual .exe. The

Re: Why latest version of gdb (6.7.1) isn't in cygwin distribution

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Rémi Perrot on 2/11/2008 2:21 AM: | Is it because gdb license change to gpl 3 ? No. Cygwin already distributes other GPLv3+ projects. | Or is it because of some missing human resources to make/test a new | package of this tools ? Bing

Re: Why latest version of gdb (6.7.1) isn't in cygwin distribution

Rémi Perrot wrote: Hello, I try to use Eclipse gdb and Rhapsody and face some trouble with the cygwin version of gdb (GNU gdb 6.5.50.20060706-cvs (cygwin-special)). So I have successfully compile the 6.7.1 version of GDB and try it. I had better result with this one. I would like to know if I

Why latest version of gdb (6.7.1) isn't in cygwin distribution

Hello, I try to use Eclipse gdb and Rhapsody and face some trouble with the cygwin version of gdb (GNU gdb 6.5.50.20060706-cvs (cygwin-special)). So I have successfully compile the 6.7.1 version of GDB and try it. I had better result with this one. I would like to know if I am lucky and if will h

Re: "diff" command missing in cygwin distribution ?

nary-mode and back). Now I'm using > test-mode. > > Now my script fails on a diff command. And to my surprise I can't find > "diff" in my cygwin-folder. > Shouldn't it be there ?? > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%22diff%22-comm

Re: "diff" command missing in cygwin distribution ?

On 11/21/2007, Finof wrote: Hi, I just installed cygwin 2.573.2.2 directly from internet. Trying to get my linux-scripts working I repeated the installation a few times (only changing text-mode to binary-mode and back). Now I'm using test-mode. 2.573.2.2 is the version of 'setup.exe', not any

Re: "diff" command missing in cygwin distribution ?

Finof wrote, On 21.11.2007 11:57: > Hi, > > I just installed cygwin 2.573.2.2 directly from internet. > Trying to get my linux-scripts working I repeated the installation a few > times (only changing text-mode to binary-mode and back). Now I'm using > test-mode. > > Now my script fails on a di

"diff" command missing in cygwin distribution ?

find "diff" in my cygwin-folder. Shouldn't it be there ?? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%22diff%22-command-missing-in-cygwin-distribution---tf4849350.html#a13874870 Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe info:

Re: pdftex.cfg is missing in tetex distribution in Cygwin

No, looks rather like mecnahism is obsolete and is not used in newer versions anymore. /wbr Ariel Burbaickij On 6/30/07, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 30 June 2007 17:58, Ariel Burbaickij wrote: > Hello all, > following situation: I do not have pdftex.cfg installed inside my cygwin >

RE: pdftex.cfg is missing in tetex distribution in Cygwin

On 30 June 2007 17:58, Ariel Burbaickij wrote: > Hello all, > following situation: I do not have pdftex.cfg installed inside my cygwin > installation (meaning it was for sure not dleted unintentionally as the > packet was reinstalled and it is still missing), So, question is: Is it on > purpose an

pdftex.cfg is missing in tetex distribution in Cygwin

Hello all, following situation: I do not have pdftex.cfg installed inside my cygwin installation (meaning it was for sure not dleted unintentionally as the packet was reinstalled and it is still missing), So, question is: Is it on purpose and what is suggested to use instead as I need to add sever

Question about cygwin Ruby distribution

One of our users here who likes to use Ruby was trying to use the cygwin distribution, and then tried to fetch some "ruby gems". His Ruby installation ended up getting corrupted with native (non-Cygwin) libraries being loaded for some of the ruby gems, causing all sorts of interestin

Cygwin Perl 5.8.7 - Thread signalling gives errors in standard distribution

22 A thread exited while 2 threads were running. After installing the newest threads module from CPAN (v1.57, http://search.cpan.org/~jdhedden/threads-1.57/), everything works fine. I believe, the cygwin distribution still uses an outdated threads module. Has an

RE: Making and selling a Cygwin distribution

Christopher Faylor wrote: > Btw, if you are going to be creating your own distro don't forget to > set up a forum to support it. We don't support other releases here. Yes, that and more -- Cygwin mirror, development box/VM, test boxes/VM's, e-commerce store, payment processing, and other infrastr

Re: Making and selling a Cygwin distribution

On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 09:26:29PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: >Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> You may make and sell a distro. You have to make the source >> available the same way you make the binaries available (CD/DVD/ISO). >> The GPL FAQ is very enlightening to read: >> http://www.gnu.org/lice

RE: Making and selling a Cygwin distribution

Corinna Vinschen wrote: > You may make and sell a distro. You have to make the source > available the same way you make the binaries available (CD/DVD/ISO). > The GPL FAQ is very enlightening to read: > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html Thanks! :-) David -- Unsubscribe info: http

Re: Making and selling a Cygwin distribution

On Jan 19 22:22, David Christensen wrote: > I've wondered if it is permissible to make and sell a Cygwin distribution (CD, > DVD, downloadable ISO, etc.). Looking at the Cygwin license page: > > http://www.cygwin.com/licensing.html > > I think so (because the GPL allo

Making and selling a Cygwin distribution

com/faq/faq.setup.html#faq.setup.setup That said, I figured out how to create my own Cygwin distribution CD using an Internet-connected Windows machine: 1. I create the directory C:\cygwin\setup. 2. I download setup.exe into the above directory. 3. I run setup.exe, configure it to use

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Urgh, sorry, that's not quite right. When you only point to the mirror, you have the problem that the software you're using on the CD might not be available on the mirror anymore, since the maintainer(s) moved on and erased old versions. In that case you're violating the GPL again. So you will

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

On Nov 22 12:24, Oliver Wienand wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>if our institution is hosting a Cygwin repository mirror, would this be > >>sufficient for the term side-by-side. > > > >Sounds good to me, but you should public the mirror URL on > >http://www.singular.uni-kl.de. If you have a

RE: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

> -Original Message- > From: Oliver Wienand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 22 November 2005 02:03 > To: cygwin@cygwin.com > Cc: William J. Leslie > Subject: Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software. > > Hello, > > we have similar

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Corinna Vinschen wrote: if our institution is hosting a Cygwin repository mirror, would this be sufficient for the term side-by-side. Sounds good to me, but you should public the mirror URL on http://www.singular.uni-kl.de. If you have a traffic problem, feel free to add another note that "a l

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

On Nov 22 11:08, Oliver Wienand wrote: > Hello, > > if our institution is hosting a Cygwin repository mirror, would this be > sufficient for the term side-by-side. Sounds good to me, but you should public the mirror URL on http://www.singular.uni-kl.de. If you have a traffic problem, feel free

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

On Nov 22 01:57, Brian Dessent wrote: > Oliver Wienand wrote: > > > had I to ship the sources or it is sufficient to install an unmodified > > version of Cygwin setup, which allows to get all the sources? > > No, you can't just point people to the cygwin mirrors to get sources, > even if your bin

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Hello, if our institution is hosting a Cygwin repository mirror, would this be sufficient for the term side-by-side. Other means, as just put a large archive on the page where you can download the installer with all the sources we use would be a little uncomfortable for the user and therefore

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Oliver Wienand wrote: > had I to ship the sources or it is sufficient to install an unmodified > version of Cygwin setup, which allows to get all the sources? No, you can't just point people to the cygwin mirrors to get sources, even if your binaries are unmodified. You have to provide them as a

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

From: Oliver Wienand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 10:41 am Subject: Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software. > Hello, > > had I to ship the sources or it is sufficient to install an > unmodified > version of Cygwin setup, which allows t

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Hello, had I to ship the sources or it is sufficient to install an unmodified version of Cygwin setup, which allows to get all the sources? At the moment we do only the last thing and install the setup.exe in the start menu. If this is against the GPL, I will add the sources of course. But I

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

bles with "Package for the Web", containing a > suitable small distribution of Cygwin with Singular and modified the > stored repository and the setup.exe, so that the user must only choose > the destination directory. > > 3. A further modified version of setup.exe is shipped wi

Re: Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Hello, we have similar problems with Singular. I have used the following solutions: 1. Singular is a Cygwin package, so experienced users can just use the Cygwin setup. 2. I have build executeables with "Package for the Web", containing a suitable small distribution of Cygwin wit

Proper distribution of cygwin-dependent software.

Hello, I am planning to release a program on CD-ROM, and I am wondering if there's a proper way to install the dependencies. The program depends on several cygwin dlls, including cygwin1.dll. >From what I've read on the lists, it seems to be poor practice to install a >private copy of cygwin1.

Re: Building a common cygwin enviroment for network distribution

I've looked around the Cygwin site for information on installation that doesn't use the supplied setup.exe, and I've found a lot of "you on your own" so I'm hoping to get some help here. Thanks! What so wrong with setup.exe? I am doing a similar cygwin roll out at my work site and I use setup.

Re: Building a common cygwin enviroment for network distribution

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Brian Dessent wrote: > Carl Perry wrote: > > > I've built an NSIS installer taht copies all the files and creates > > all the necessary icons - however things are not functioning as > > expected. > > If you're not copying the mounts, you're almost certainly going to run > into

Re: Building a common cygwin enviroment for network distribution

Carl Perry wrote: > I've built an NSIS installer taht copies all the files and creates > all the necessary icons - however things are not functioning as > expected. If you're not copying the mounts, you're almost certainly going to run into problems. The "correct" way to do this is to do "mount

Building a common cygwin enviroment for network distribution

Greetings! First off, thanks to all for Cygwin - this is a great system that saves us massive amounts of time. I'm currently preparing to deploy Cygwin to replace some commercial tools on our network. I have everything working the way I want on my machine, and would like to "capture" this co

Corrupted distribution files

docbook-xsl/docbook-xsl-1.67.2-1-src.tar.bz2 and gettext/libintl1/libintl1-0.10.40-1-src.tar.bz2 appear to be corrupt on some of the distribution servers. I've checked three separate mirrors: http://mirrors.kernel.org/sources.redhat.com/cygwin/release/, http://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/

Re: Cygwin Distribution DVD's ready

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 10:11:37AM -0500, Robert Pendell wrote: >I will be starting my own distribution as of January 1st, 2005. The >costs are as follows and since I will be starting my own online >store I will be inflating these costs a bit to cover for online fees >and such so it

Re: Cygwin Distribution DVD's ready

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Email me for the mailing address (I guess you have to do this anyways). I won't post it here. Robert Pendell wrote: | I will be starting my own distribution as of January 1st, 2005. The | costs are as follows and since I will be starting m

Cygwin Distribution DVD's ready

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I will be starting my own distribution as of January 1st, 2005. The costs are as follows and since I will be starting my own online store I will be inflating these costs a bit to cover for online fees and such so it can takeoff in Feburary 2005

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

development packages, these all are basic libraries or compilers for developers. And, yet, I'm a developer, and I don't have one of those libraries on my system. Anyway, I think I got your point. I was really missing top, but today I learned that it is already part of the distribution. Do w

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

you >>>>asked for development packages, these all are basic libraries or >>>>compilers for developers. >>> >>> >>>And, yet, I'm a developer, and I don't have one of those libraries on my >>>system. > >>Anyway, I

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

7;m a developer, and I don't have one of those libraries on my system. Anyway, I think I got your point. I was really missing top, but today I learned that it is already part of the distribution. Do we have the at command? smartmontools? ntfs-progs? some watchdog? I'm looking i

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

ckages that are missing from the cygwin distribution. You certainly can't put "adns" in the same classification as bind. Yep, since adns is just a client and requires bind or another resolver. I could have easily gone to the Debian web site and pulled down a list of hundreds of packag

RE: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

> > > screen > > > > In some cases we have packages which offer > similar-but-not-identical behavior > > but in some cases (ping, screen) we don't have anything > close, AFAIK. > > I've been running screen on cygwin for years - originally using > http://dellelce.com/code/screen/ - though it wa

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

of those libraries on my system. I am looking for standard, frequently used linux packages that are missing from the cygwin distribution. You certainly can't put "adns" in the same classification as bind. I could have easily gone to the Debian web site and pulled down a list of hu

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

Christopher Faylor wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: bind I have bind here, please someone grab it and make a package from this initial port, the server needs more testing: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/DNS/bind-9.2.2/ coreutils mailx p

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

Christopher Faylor wrote: On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: bind I have bind here, please someone grab it and make a package from this initial port, the server needs more testing: http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/DNS/bind-9.2.2/ coreutils mailx p

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 04:41:23PM +0100, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>bind > >I have bind here, please someone grab it and make a package from this >initial port, the server needs more testing: > http://anfaenger.de/cygwin/DNS/bind-9.2.2/ > >>coreutils >>mailx >>ping >>se

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

stuff more video stuff $ hello bash: hello: command not found You can probably see where I'm going with this. I'd like to see if there are any volunteers to offer and support these packages. Any of the above is guaranteed to make it into the distribution as long as the pack

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

ch are missing > from the cygwin distribution: > > bind > mailx I had a go at porting this around the same time I tried to port elm - it wasn't much fun. aux.c didn't help any. ;) > screen > > In some cases we have packages which offer similar-but-not-identical behavio

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

Ok. That is fine. I got xmove running on cygwin, so if you want I can contribute the executable and/or slighlty modified makefile if required. It would be great if we could port xmx to cygwin On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:15:43 -0400, Yaakov Selkowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED M

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ariel Burbaickij wrote: | script I have an implementation of script, based on a message to this list a few years ago, available on my project webpage: http://sourceforge.net/projects/cygwin-ports/ It works fine for me. Seeing as this is among the Frequ

Re: packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

script On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:22:54 -0400, Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is an off-the-top-of-my-head list of standard packages which are missing > from the cygwin distribution: > > bind > coreutils > mailx > ping > sendmail > screen &g

packages that should be in the cygwin distribution but aren't

This is an off-the-top-of-my-head list of standard packages which are missing from the cygwin distribution: bind coreutils mailx ping sendmail screen In some cases we have packages which offer similar-but-not-identical behavior but in some cases (ping, screen) we don't have anything close,

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole cygwin release/ distribution

On Oct 6 11:09, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:47:15PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: > >Go with the Redhat scheme and use "Cygwin 1.6.0". > > Please don't do this. Red Hat is using the even numbers. I don't know > if there is already a 1.6.0 [...] There is. Corinna -- Co

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole cygwin release/ distribution

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:47:15PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: >Karl M schrieb: >>What about calling it B21? ":> > >As already discussed on cygwin-talk and as officially described on the >webpage, "B" stood for Beta that times (up to 1998). > >We are already stable since a few years, though we use u

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole cygwin release/ distribution

On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 10:19:29PM -0700, Karl M wrote: >Hi All... > >What about calling it B21? ":> It's as good a name for vaporware as any. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

Karl M schrieb: What about calling it B21? ":> As already discussed on cygwin-talk and as officially described on the webpage, "B" stood for Beta that times (up to 1998). We are already stable since a few years, though we use uneven version numbers, marking it as developer releases. So we coul

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

On Oct 5 22:19, Karl M wrote: > Hi All... > > What about calling it B21? ":> *cough* Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#un

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

n/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 21:00:37 -0700 On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:31:26 -0700, David Christensen wrote: > Per the Cygwin FAQ (http://cygwin.com/faq.html): > > "If you are looking for the version number for the whole Cygwin

Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

e packages in Cygwin are continually improving, thanks to the > efforts of net volunteers who maintain the Cygwin binary ports. Each > package has its own version numbers and its own release process. " > > I would especially like to request that there be a "stable" distrib

Re: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

Dave Korn wrote: > Hey! I found a bug in b19! I wanna report it! Dude, upgrade to B20. It has no defects whatsoever. It even has toast and coffee waiting for me every morning. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com

RE: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

> -Original Message- > From: Jörg Schaible > Sent: 05 October 2004 10:26 > To: Dave Korn; cygwin > Subject: RE: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues) > > Dave Korn wrote on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:14 AM: > > > Hey! I found a

RE: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

Dave Korn wrote on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:14 AM: > Hey! I found a bug in b19! I wanna report it! Forget it! Was fixed in B20 and that one had no bugs EVER! - Jörg -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html

RE: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > Sent: 05 October 2004 09:33 > > > Version: > > 1.0 (official) > > 1.3.x > > Do we really need the old versions? > > > 1.5.10 > > 1.5.11 > > snapshot Hey! I found a bug in b

Re: Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

On Oct 4 23:15, Reini Urban wrote: > Reini Urban schrieb: > >Product: add "Cygwin" > > long description: Corinna? What's the question? > >Version: > > Should probably be based on the cygwin dll versions: > > 1.3.x > > 1.5.10 > > 1.5.11 > > latest snapshot > > T

Re: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues

On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 11:56:28PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote: >Brian Dessent schrieb: >>Reini Urban wrote: >>>Ok. Just an additional entry in the "Product" list >>>at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/ >> >>Surely you mean and it >>looks like a few c

Re: whole Cygwin release/ distribution issues

Gerrit P. Haase schrieb: Hallo Reini, Am Montag, 4. Oktober 2004 um 21:06 schriebst du: * perl layout (better upgrade convenience) will be changed in the next update, I promise;) So we'll need another full recompile of all our extensions? :) No problem, if it stays then until perl6 or another xs A

Re: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues

Brian Dessent schrieb: Reini Urban wrote: Ok. Just an additional entry in the "Product" list at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/ Surely you mean and it looks like a few categories are already there. I don't think the Redhat project cares about ou

Re: whole Cygwin release/ distribution issues

Hallo Reini, Am Montag, 4. Oktober 2004 um 21:06 schriebst du: > Gerrit P. Haase schrieb: >>>gcc-core > 3.3.3 >>> needs libtool-devel-1.5.10 (still in test) for >>> libtoolized packages: .rdata bug >> >> Not a bug, a feature? > ?? I don't know if it is a bug or a feature, it may well be

Bugzilla (was: whole cygwin release/ distribution issues)

Reini Urban schrieb: Product: add "Cygwin" long description: Corinna? Version: Should probably be based on the cygwin dll versions: 1.3.x 1.5.10 1.5.11 latest snapshot Then there is the remaining problem with existing Redhat support for the official Cygwin ver

  1   2   3   >