On 10 June 2010 06:07, Steven Woody wrote:
> I found some windows native command-line programs can not run in
> mintty, while they can in the old cygwin shell window.
>
> For example, there is a windows command line application, slrn, (a
> nntp news reader), when it is started from mintty, it will
Hi,
I found some windows native command-line programs can not run in
mintty, while they can in the old cygwin shell window.
For example, there is a windows command line application, slrn, (a
nntp news reader), when it is started from mintty, it will report
"unable to determine the screen size" a
On 9 June 2010 21:01, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 6/9/2010 5:11 AM, Steven Woody wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> When I hit C-x C-c and intend to exit cygwin, but I get only an error
>> message: "C-x C-g" is undefined. What's the problem? And, How can I
>> exit from emacs?
>
> You're probably running emacs in t
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:51:14AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 10:50:34AM -0400, Stephen Morton wrote:
>>We use a make environment that is part cygwin and part pure windows
>>executables (long story). And it all works in linux too. I suspect
>>it would break in the wor
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 05:28:16PM +0100, Julio Costa wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 16:47, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:02:16PM +0100, Julio Costa wrote:
>>>On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 14:20, Eric Blake wrote:
Have you ever encountered a makefile that doesn't consis
On 6/9/2010 1:59 PM, curiousgeorge wrote:
Hi,
I installed cygwin on windows server 2003 and am trying to learn about cron.
I created a simple script as follows:
#!/usr/bin/bash
#move the file every 1 min
echo 'date'>> datelog.txt
mv datelog.txt outbound
I then created a crontab using the comma
Hi,
I installed cygwin on windows server 2003 and am trying to learn about cron.
I created a simple script as follows:
#!/usr/bin/bash
#move the file every 1 min
echo 'date' >> datelog.txt
mv datelog.txt outbound
I then created a crontab using the command crontab -e as follows:
# DO NOT EDIT THI
On 09/06/2010 15:14, Eric Blake wrote:
> However, I'm starting to like the idea, if we can get buy-in from the
> gcc packager. Dave?
Yeh, sure, it's a trivial change; there's no trouble making the compiler do
whatever we decide is the distro standard. I have no particular opinion on
the matte
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 16:51, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 10:50:34AM -0400, Stephen Morton wrote:
>>We use a make environment that is part cygwin and part pure windows
>>executables (long story). And it all works in linux too. I suspect
>>it would break in the worst ugly way
Oleksandr Gavenko schrieb am 08.06.2010 um 16:47 (+0300):
> $ touch my.exe
> $ touch some-file
> $ cp some-file my
> cp: cannot create regular file `my': File exists
> $ cp -f some-file my
> cp: cannot create regular file `my': File exists
>
> Same happen ever in cmd.exe so this is not 'ba
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 16:47, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:02:16PM +0100, Julio Costa wrote:
>>On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 14:20, Eric Blake wrote:
>>>
>>> Have you ever encountered a makefile that doesn't consistently use
>>> $(EXEEXT) everywhere? ??Too many people just expect
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 10:50:34AM -0400, Stephen Morton wrote:
>We use a make environment that is part cygwin and part pure windows
>executables (long story). And it all works in linux too. I suspect
>it would break in the worst ugly ways if the .exe magic did not exist.
And, it is this kind of t
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:02:16PM +0100, Julio Costa wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 14:20, Eric Blake wrote:
>>
>> Have you ever encountered a makefile that doesn't consistently use
>> $(EXEEXT) everywhere? ??Too many people just expect 'gcc -o foo ...' to
>> produce foo, then 'strip foo' to work,
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 15:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jun 9 08:14, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 06/09/2010 08:08 AM, Andy Koppe wrote:
>> >>> More importantly, a lot of build scripts likely depend on the .exe being
>> >>> added automatically.
>> >>
>> >> Hm. Maybe they shouldn't.
>> >
>> > Yeah,
So if you're going to do this crazy thing, you've got to be prepared
to accommodate Windows's various quirks, one of which is this .com
.exe and .lnk business.
I think that it would still be possible to have cygwin
look for foo.exe when searching for an executable and
it does not find foo. But
Eric Blake wrote:
> Alexander T wrote:
>
> > Why not just do the exe magic for executing the files only? When
> > opening, stating, copying, moving etc, you could leave it out. This
> > seems the most reasonable compromise to me, but there could of course
> > be cases which I am overseeing, but I w
On 6/9/2010 10:29 AM, Eliot Moss wrote:
On 6/9/2010 10:14 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 06/09/2010 08:08 AM, Andy Koppe wrote:
But even with that gcc change, we'd have to keep .exe magic in
cygwin1.dll until everything in the distro has been rebuilt without an
.exe suffix.
Maybe this is simplist
On Jun 9 08:14, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/09/2010 08:08 AM, Andy Koppe wrote:
> >>> More importantly, a lot of build scripts likely depend on the .exe being
> >>> added automatically.
> >>
> >> Hm. Maybe they shouldn't.
> >
> > Yeah, but "shouldn't" never stopped anyone, hence any transition wou
On 06/09/2010 08:08 AM, Andy Koppe wrote:
>>> More importantly, a lot of build scripts likely depend on the .exe being
>>> added automatically.
>>
>> Hm. Maybe they shouldn't.
>
> Yeah, but "shouldn't" never stopped anyone, hence any transition would
> certainly not be pain-free.
A first step wo
On 9 June 2010 14:50, Julio Costa wrote:
[Running in cmd.exe]
>>> The point is, that *is not* a reason, because it is easily fixed by
>>> "set PATHEXE=%PATHEXE%:.".
>>
>> That's a nice one. I certainly didn't know about that.
>>
>> Explorer still needs the .exe though.
>
> Nope also.
> Try thi
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 14:20, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> Have you ever encountered a makefile that doesn't consistently use
> $(EXEEXT) everywhere? Too many people just expect 'gcc -o foo ...' to
> produce foo, then 'strip foo' to work, without realizing that on cygwin,
> gcc created 'foo.exe' and stri
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:39, Andy Koppe wrote:
> On 9 June 2010 10:48, Julio Costa wrote:
And this is where my head got reeeally spinning... can anyone, please,
explain the reason to why this .exe magic exists, anyway?
>
> As far as I understand it, the original reason for it was that Wind
On 06/09/2010 07:14 AM, Alexander T wrote:
[please don't top-post]
> Why not just do the exe magic for executing the files only? When
> opening, stating, copying, moving etc, you could leave it out. This
> seems the most reasonable compromise to me, but there could of course
> be cases which I am
Boa tarde.
Disponibiliza nas suas facturas referências multibanco, para facilitar os
pagamentos aos seus Clientes ?
Em muito pouco tempo, 5 a 10 minutos, poderá registar-se na nossa plataforma de
meios de pagamento, sem qualquer custo de registo/adesão, podendo de imediato
testar as refer
Boa tarde.
Disponibiliza nas suas facturas referências multibanco, para facilitar os
pagamentos aos seus Clientes ?
Em muito pouco tempo, 5 a 10 minutos, poderá registar-se na nossa plataforma de
meios de pagamento, sem qualquer custo de registo/adesão, podendo de imediato
testar as refer
Why not just do the exe magic for executing the files only? When
opening, stating, copying, moving etc, you could leave it out. This
seems the most reasonable compromise to me, but there could of course
be cases which I am overseeing, but I wouldn't expect any script to
rely on exe magic when openi
On 6/9/2010 5:11 AM, Steven Woody wrote:
Hi,
When I hit C-x C-c and intend to exit cygwin, but I get only an error
message: "C-x C-g" is undefined. What's the problem? And, How can I
exit from emacs?
You're probably running emacs in the Cygwin console. If so, you have to
make sure your CYGW
On 9 June 2010 10:48, Julio Costa wrote:
>>>And this is where my head got reeeally spinning... can anyone, please,
>>>explain the reason to why this .exe magic exists, anyway?
As far as I understand it, the original reason for it was that Windows
9x always required it. Of course Cygwin 1.7 no long
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:36, prakash babu wrote:
> I know that cygwin 1.5 is no longer supported but since my application
> requires ssh to be setup and extensively uses chmod on MS-DOS paths I want
> atleast the the cygwin 1.5 install and ssh setup done successfully.
>
Why don't you use the c
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 05:40, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 02:38:30AM +0100, Julio Costa wrote:
>>And this is where my head got reeeally spinning... can anyone, please,
>>explain the reason to why this .exe magic exists, anyway?
>
> It's already been explained in this very th
I know that cygwin 1.5 is no longer supported but since my application requires
ssh to be setup and extensively uses chmod on MS-DOS paths I want atleast the
the cygwin 1.5 install and ssh setup done successfully.
Hence I installed cygwin 1.5 on three windows XP machines using setup-legacy.exe
Hi,
When I hit C-x C-c and intend to exit cygwin, but I get only an error
message: "C-x C-g" is undefined. What's the problem? And, How can I
exit from emacs?
Another related problem is, when I hit the Alt-Shift-# and intend to
launch the 'Calc' package, but only get 'M-# is undefined. How do
32 matches
Mail list logo
