Hello,
It looks like the new setup-x86_64.exe is not code-signed? Is that on
purpose? IIRC, the previous versions were code-signed. Do we now only
rely on the .sig signature file to verify it?
Cheers,
Kal
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cyg
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:33 PM, David Karr wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> I've checked with Caffeine and traced mintty. It receives F15 key down, the
>> key up. Caffeine claims to send key up only but that's not true. Please
>> report this as a bug to Caffeine.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 4:50 PM, cyg Simple wrote:
> And if we were purely *nix your argument might hold merit but this setup
> executable provides a Windows OS based install of a Windows based
> application set known as Cygwin.
If we were purely *nix, we wouldn't be on Windows in the first place
On 12/14/2016 4:17 PM, Erik Soderquist wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Vlado wrote:
>> Erik (and others),
>>
>> don't worry about Setup version, please.
>>
>> Use this script:
>> https://gist.github.com/Vlado-99/1d59bf05b70481377ff90bb53e13bb2d
>>
>> - Setup is downloaded only if gpg sign
On 12/14/2016 10:28 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:15:46AM -0500, cyg Simple wrote:
>> On 12/10/2016 3:39 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:00:12AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:55:49AM -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> I've checked with Caffeine and traced mintty. It receives F15 key down, the
> key up. Caffeine claims to send key up only but that's not true. Please
> report this as a bug to Caffeine.
Understood. I just did that. However, will that reall
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Vlado wrote:
> Erik (and others),
>
> don't worry about Setup version, please.
>
> Use this script:
> https://gist.github.com/Vlado-99/1d59bf05b70481377ff90bb53e13bb2d
>
> - Setup is downloaded only if gpg signature changes (only very small .sig
> file is re-downloa
From: Achim Gratz
> I said "-exec +", although I concur it was too easy to miss.
Indeed, I overlooked the "+" and was unfamiliar with that option
to find. Glad I asked. Learned something today. Thanx for the
clarification. ☺
--Ken Nellis
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.htm
Greetings, David Karr!
> I use a tool called "Windows Caffeine" that is used to keep the
> display awake.
What's wrong with correctly configured power saving settings?…
--
With best regards,
Andrey Repin
Wednesday, December 14, 2016 23:07:16
Sorry for my terrible english...
Am 14.12.2016 um 18:48 schrieb David Karr:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:18 AM, David Karr wrote:
Win7. I believe my Cygwin version info is "2.5.2(0.297/5/3) 2016-06-23 14:29".
I've been annoyed for a while with a symptom in my mintty windows. I
will be typing along, or not, and suddenly a "~"
Nellis, Kenneth writes:
> Really? I always thought the opposite. With -exec, doesn't
> find invoke the command for each single found object? While xargs
> allows a single command to operate on a whole slew of objects.
I said "-exec +", although I concur it was too easy to miss.
> For example:
>
On 13/12/2016 16:57, Ian Lambert via cygwin wrote:
Looking for suggestions on cleaning up package directories,
https://cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#faq.setup.disk-space
has a broken link, again, to clean_setup.pl ?
Mailing list search finds:
https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2009-06/msg00573.html
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:18 AM, David Karr wrote:
> Win7. I believe my Cygwin version info is "2.5.2(0.297/5/3) 2016-06-23
> 14:29".
>
> I've been annoyed for a while with a symptom in my mintty windows. I
> will be typing along, or not, and suddenly a "~" character gets
> injected into the s
Greetings, Nellis, Kenneth!
>> From: Achim Gratz
>> .. the latter is slightly less efficient and you have to
>> do -print0/-0, but I tend to get it right more easily then the -exec
>> stuff.
> Really? I always thought the opposite. With -exec, doesn't
> find invoke the command for each single fo
Greetings, Yaakov Selkowitz!
> On 2016-12-13 12:06, Andrey Repin wrote:
>> Here's strace and stackdump from latest crash with Cygwin 2.6.1-2
>> project.rootdir.org/.offload/crash-php-7.14.tar.xz
> Are you 100% sure that your code is compatible with PHP 7? The only
> segfaults I have seen so far
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:15:46AM -0500, cyg Simple wrote:
>On 12/10/2016 3:39 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:00:12AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:55:49AM -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
cygsimple wrote:
> See the description
On 12/14/2016 2:34 AM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On 2016-12-13 12:06, Andrey Repin wrote:
>> Here's strace and stackdump from latest crash with Cygwin 2.6.1-2
>> project.rootdir.org/.offload/crash-php-7.14.tar.xz
>
> Are you 100% sure that your code is compatible with PHP 7? The only
> segfaults
On 12/10/2016 3:39 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:00:12AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:55:49AM -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>>> cygsimple wrote:
See the description below of a problem that is occurring because of
DMARC rules
Hi folks,
I uploaded a new Cygwin test release 2.6.1-0.3.
2.6.1 will be a bugfix release only and the last release in 2016.
This 0.3 only contains an internal change which hardens reads and
writes on /dev/random and /dev/urandom against crashes.
This version will likely become the official rel
> From: Achim Gratz
> .. the latter is slightly less efficient and you have to
> do -print0/-0, but I tend to get it right more easily then the -exec
> stuff.
Really? I always thought the opposite. With -exec, doesn't
find invoke the command for each single found object? While xargs
allows a sin
20 matches
Mail list logo
