Re: 1.3.21-1 broken on Win9x - IsProcessorFeaturePresent not autoloaded

2003-03-17 Thread Max Bowsher
Hardie, Chris wrote: > Alrighty. Where can I find old distros? I've given the site a > once-over and I can't find a binary release of the previous version... setup.exe The fact that you can't find any downloadables apart from setup.exe should have been a clue. Max. -- Unsubscribe info: ht

Re: 1.3.21-1 broken on Win9x - IsProcessorFeaturePresent not autoloaded

2003-03-17 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Hardie, Chris wrote: > >Looks like when the /proc/cpuinfo feature was added, someone forgot to > >register a new function with the autoload magic. Basically, 1.3.21-1 is > >broken for Win9x. You will have to roll back to 1.3.20 and wait for a > >re-release. > >Max. > > Alright

RE: 1.3.21-1 broken on Win9x - IsProcessorFeaturePresent not autoloaded (was: Cygwin installation choke)

2003-03-13 Thread Chris January
> Chris Hardie wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I can't seem to find any details about this error, so I'm tossing it > > out there. > > > > After installing the newest version of Cygwin, it chokes when it > > tries to launch. > > > > "The CYGWIN1.DLL is linked to missing export > > KERNEL32.DLL:IsProcessorF

Re: 1.3.21-1 broken on Win9x - IsProcessorFeaturePresent not autoloaded (was: cygwin installation choke)

2003-03-13 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 05:28:30PM -, Max Bowsher wrote: >Chris Hardie wrote: >> Hey, >> >> I can't seem to find any details about this error, so I'm tossing it >> out there. >> >> After installing the newest version of Cygwin, it chokes when it >> tries to launch. >> >> "The CYGWIN1.DLL is lin

Re: 1.3.21: rsh fails with select problem

2003-03-13 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 09:46:35AM +0100, Teun Burgers wrote: > With cygwin 1.3.21 cygwin's rsh fails to connect to an OSF machine. > > $rsh -l username OSF_machine ls > rsh: select: Bad file descriptor > > Up to 1.3.20 it worked as expected. > > $login -l username OSF_machine > > still works u

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-27 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 09:12:41AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > While you are at it, can you enhance the educational experience ^^ Serves me right for idle *and* public reflections... :,) > by looking at the starting wso

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-26 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > Using good old fashioned strings and Andre's suggestion I have isolated > the registry keys requiring read access for Everyone (which did not > already have it) to the following: > > 1. HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Winsock\Parameters > 2. HKLM\System\Cur

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-26 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 06:29:01PM -0500, Andre Bleau wrote: > Sorry to jump in now. A good way to resolve that kind of problem is > auditing. As administrator, enable auditing. With regedt32, enable > auditing on selected keys and subkeys for read or write failure, as > required. You will

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Andre Bleau
Pierre, Jason, Sorry to jump in now. A good way to resolve that kind of problem is auditing. As administrator, enable auditing. With regedt32, enable auditing on selected keys and subkeys for read or write failure, as required. You will find results in event viewer, in the security log. Yes,

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > Bingo! The following key did not have read access for Everyone: > > HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM > Great! > After granting access, then exim would start up even though its primary > group is my mail group and not the Users one. > > Do you want me further isolate? If so

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 04:19:03PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > > > > > Another possibility is registry access. Is there a way to insure > > > that Everyone has read access to the whole registry? > > > > regedt32 can change permissions. Any particular subtree

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > > Another possibility is registry access. Is there a way to insure > > that Everyone has read access to the whole registry? > > regedt32 can change permissions. Any particular subtree that I should > try? Right, I had forgotten. I am still using regedit. First see if any

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 03:44:03PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > > I tried adding a group:mail:r-x ACL to the following: > > > > /mnt/c > > [snip] > > Thanks No problem. > > but I still failed in the same way. > > With hindsight it's not surprising be

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Christopher Faylor wrote: > > Perhaps this is completely off the wall but I don't recall anyone > answering my question about exim and pthreads. Does exim use threads? > No. Pierre -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 03:44:03PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: >Jason Tishler wrote: >> >> I tried adding a group:mail:r-x ACL to the following: >> >> /mnt/c >> /mnt/c/WINNT >> /mnt/c/WINNT/system32 >> /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/drivers >> /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/drivers/etc >>

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > I tried adding a group:mail:r-x ACL to the following: > > /mnt/c > /mnt/c/WINNT > /mnt/c/WINNT/system32 > /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/drivers > /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/drivers/etc > /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/drivers/etc/services > /mnt/c/WINNT/system32/*.dll

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 12:43:31PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > > The above fixed the problem. I apologize for not being able to > > figure this out myself. > > Actually I'd rather have you hit this problem than almost anybody > else. Figuring out what was ha

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > Pierre, > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 10:02:49AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > > So I suggest a simple test: edit /etc/passwd and change the gid of the > > exim user to 545, then run again. > > The above fixed the problem. I apologize for not being able to figure > th

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 10:02:49AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > So I suggest a simple test: edit /etc/passwd and change the gid of the > exim user to 545, then run again. The above fixed the problem. I apologize for not being able to figure this out myself. > By the way, I am not s

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > Could you run exim -bd -d -c (skip the -q15m for simplicity) and > > look at the output. If nothing is obvious, send it to me I will > > compare it with the output of a local run. > > See attached for a 4.10-2 and 4.12-3 run. > Jason 4.10-2: changed uid/gid: running a

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Earnie, On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 03:15:56PM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > >Any further suggestions? Note this is very painful to debug because > >I can't use gdb and I can't send mail when trying to debug. Sigh... > >:,( > > You might try DebugView from sysinternals.com. Th

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-25 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 05:15:38PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > > > If you run with -d you will see that exim sheds all supplementary > > > groups. > > > > I was just following the README: >

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-24 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > Pierre, > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > > If you run with -d you will see that exim sheds all supplementary > > groups. > > I was just following the README: > >cygrunsrv -I exim -p /usr/bin/exim -e CYGWIN=ntsec \ >

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-24 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > If you run with -d you will see that exim sheds all supplementary > groups. I was just following the README: cygrunsrv -I exim -p /usr/bin/exim -e CYGWIN=ntsec \ -a "-bdf -q15m" -d "Exim Mail Transfer Ag

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-24 Thread Pierre A. Humblet
Jason Tishler wrote: > > Pierre, > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 01:22:01PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > > > This reminds me of something similar, possibly last month. Look for > > > "exim", "services", "gerritt" In the end it was because exim was > > > running as a special user who didn't ha

Re: exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-24 Thread Earnie Boyd
Jason Tishler wrote: Any further suggestions? Note this is very painful to debug because I can't use gdb and I can't send mail when trying to debug. Sigh... :,( You might try DebugView from sysinternals.com. The strace data will appear in a nice searchable window. This method avoids the it wo

exim 4.12-3 winsock problem (was Re: 1.3.21)

2003-02-24 Thread Jason Tishler
Pierre, [I'm moving this thread to cygwin@, since it currently doesn't appear to be a cygwin-developers@ issue...] On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 02:12:09PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 01:22:01PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: > > This reminds me of something similar, possibly

Re: 1.3.21

2003-02-24 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 09:49:51AM -0600, Brian Ford wrote: >On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Jason Tishler wrote: >>Please post instead of sending private email. >> >I normally would, but I was replying to a cygwin-developers posting and >do not have permission to post there. It didn't occur to me to post to

Re: 1.3.21

2003-02-24 Thread Brian Ford
On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Jason Tishler wrote: > Brian, > > Please post instead of sending private email. > I normally would, but I was replying to a cygwin-developers posting and do not have permission to post there. It didn't occur to me to post to just cygwin. > On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 03:04:38PM

Re: 1.3.21

2003-02-22 Thread Jason Tishler
Brian, Please post instead of sending private email. On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 03:04:38PM -0600, Brian Ford wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 14:12:09PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > It also doesn't explain with gdb and strace "fixed" the bad > > permissions too. > > > > I had to revert Cygwin to