2009/10/18 Paul McFerrin:
> Yes, it is an emulation of a Kernel
No, there is no _syscall interface into the kernel as there is on
Linux and elsewhere. Cygwin emulates the C library layer instead.
However, looking at my Debian system after installing the
'manpages-dev' package, 'man 2' is actually
Paul McFerrin wrote:
> What exactly is: "local package directory".
It's the directory where setup.exe keeps local copies of all the packages it
installs, which you select on the fourth screen of setup.exe.
> My directory (/updates) is
> void of any *.ini files and it still complains. The onl
Paul McFerrin wrote:
> Are you saying that Section 2 of the man pages really don't exist?
http://cygwin.com/cgi-bin2/package-grep.cgi?grep=%2Fman2%2F
'fraid so.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
I'm a retired programmer, disabled, and several strokes. I find my use
of man pages extremely useful. More than usual. Are you saying that
Section 2 of the man pages really don't exist? That's a shame.
I'm off looking for a more recent Unix version.
Dave Korn wrote:
Andy Koppe wrote:
What exactly is: "local package directory". My directory (/updates) is
void of any *.ini files and it still complains. The only file "close"
in my whole installation is a "setup-2.ini" which always seem to get
re-created. Is maybe the mirror-site has an out-of-date .ini file?
(/updates/ftp%
Andy Koppe wrote:
> 2009/10/17 Paul McFerrin:
>> I noticed that /usr/share/man contains a "man2" sub-directory but it is
>> empty. Any particular reason? I have Category Cygwin-doc installed for
>> cygwin 1.7 but I am missing all man pages for Section 2 of the manual.
>
> Section 2 is system cal
(Sorry, accidentally hit Ctrl+enter when I was trying to press Ctrl+v
followed by enter and ended up sending an empty reply.)
Paul McFerrin wrote:
> I need a little help is getting rid of a pop-box from setup-1.7.exe:
> stating:
> "The current .ini file is from a newer version of setup.exe ...
2009/10/17 Paul McFerrin:
> I noticed that /usr/share/man contains a "man2" sub-directory but it is
> empty. Any particular reason? I have Category Cygwin-doc installed for
> cygwin 1.7 but I am missing all man pages for Section 2 of the manual.
Section 2 is system calls, which don't exist on Cy
I need a little help is getting rid of a pop-box from setup-1.7.exe:
stating:
"The current .ini file is from a newer version of setup.exe ..."
I looked high & low for a setup.ini on my system and can not find one.
Where is it locating one? I've re-download setu-1.7.exe from the web
site.an
I noticed that /usr/share/man contains a "man2" sub-directory but it is
empty. Any particular reason? I have Category Cygwin-doc installed for
cygwin 1.7 but I am missing all man pages for Section 2 of the manual.
I've been relying on the BSD distribution of the man pages and I get the
Secti
Hi,
how can I configure cygwin to use my personal installation (e.g. at
h:/cygwin), instead of the system one (s:/cygwin) ? What I tried is to
1. login winxp as user (administrator privileges are not available to
me)
2. execute some foo.reg, which inserts the mount table in the
current_u
Andy Koppe gmail.com> writes:
> > The obvious method would be to check $TERM,
> > but of course that doesn't work...
>
> ... and I can't change it to "mintty", because even if entries for it
> were added to Cygwin's termcap and terminfo, any other system would
> say "what?".
Yes. Though you co
I agree with Dave with trying to deny access to a particular user under
cygwin. The support is not there. I will touch on an actual feature
that provides this capability.
Under Amdahl UTS Unix, e.g. SVR3 like, there was feature that relied on
the proper implementation of the chroot(2) system c
Dave Korn wrote:
> My first thought would be to figure out what pth is attempting to do while
> messing in jmp_buf, and make it work. It's bad, unmaintainable code, that
> will break again in the future if ever jmp_buf is rearranged - but it only has
> to stagger along for another couple of mont
James Fuller wrote:
> This was a tongue in cheek jab at Peter because he is NOT a fan of Windows.
I have no idea who "Peter" is but please stop talking about bacon, you're
making me hungry!
cheers,
DaveK
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:
Matthias Meyer wrote:
> How to solve my goal?
> The user "backup" should backup all data but not certain directories.
It cannot be done. Your two requirements amount to:
1- I want the backup user to be able to access all files and directories
without restriction.
2- I want the backup user to
Charles Wilson wrote:
> In the short-to-medium term, it looks like converting libassuan and
> gnupg to use pthreads instead of pth won't be terribly difficult. Once
> once sig[alt]stack is available I can modify cygwin-pth to use the
> sig[alt]stack "Machine Context Implementation" instead of the
This was a tongue in cheek jab at Peter because he is NOT a fan of Windows.
James
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 6:39 PM, wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 16:46, James Fuller wrote:
>> Just a FWIW post.
>> I am a novice at Linux and know very little about cygwin but I did
>> have success with BaCon
Hello,
Is there a way to run a schtasks without being in the administrator group?
Is there a privilege, setting by editrights, which would solve that?
Thanks
Matthias
--
Don't Panic
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Document
Dave Korn wrote:
> Andy Koppe wrote:
>> 2009/10/13 Matthias Meyer:
>>> But nevertheless, user Backup can access the directory as well as the
>>> files
>>
>> Does user "Backup" have Administrator privileges?
>
> No, user "Backup User" has the "Backup/Restore" privilege. These are
> well-known
Charles Wilson wrote:
> Ach, the purist in me just wants to get pth working...
Hmm...it appears the right way to do this is NOT to add another special
case in pth: "no, on cygwin THIS is the way you poke around in the
jmp_buf" + extra cygwin TLC in pth_fork(). Instead, cygwin pth should
use the
Charles Wilson wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>> Umm, yes. Poking around directly inside a sigjmp_buf. Wonder if the
>> layout
>> is actually what that code expects it to be or not? That's where I'd start
>> looking next, anyway, if I was wondering why maybe things were randomly
>> jumping to unex
22 matches
Mail list logo
