> -Original Message-
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Problems with new setup
>
> On 2014-02-26 17:08, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
> >
> > It is also a lot bigger than the previous version.
> >
> > 73062
>On 2014-02-26 17:08, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
>> It is also a lot bigger than the previous version.
>>
>> 730624 2013-11-07 13:45:22 setup-x86.old.exe
>> 2366464 2014-02-25 13:28:35 setup-x86.exe
>>
>> Is that expected or is that an indication something?
Eric Lilja sent the fol
On 2014-02-26 17:08, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
It is also a lot bigger than the previous version.
730624 2013-11-07 13:45:22 setup-x86.old.exe
2366464 2014-02-25 13:28:35 setup-x86.exe
Is that expected or is that an indication something?
I also saw that. I downloaded my copy
Greetings, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]!
> The new setup (32 bit) now requires admin privileges, which I don't have.
> I've used all of the usual tricks, re-naming to remove "setup" from the
> name, copying by cat > new_file.exe, moving to a FAT and then back,
> playing with windows permissio
On Feb 26 16:08, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
> The new setup (32 bit) now requires admin privileges, which I don't have.
> I've used all of the usual tricks, re-naming to remove "setup" from the
> name, copying by cat > new_file.exe, moving to a FAT and then back,
> playing with window
The new setup (32 bit) now requires admin privileges, which I don't have.
I've used all of the usual tricks, re-naming to remove "setup" from the
name, copying by cat > new_file.exe, moving to a FAT and then back,
playing with windows permissions.
It is also a lot bigger than the previous version.
6 matches
Mail list logo