On Apr 26 10:49, KJ wrote:
> I've installed CygWin in the root directory "C:\Program Files
> (x86)\CygWin" (I know that it's not recommended to use spaces in the
> directory names), but my installation worked so far.
>
> I'd like to suggest a minor change when calling the _autorebase package.
> As
Am 27.03.2012 10:36, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
>>> New News:
>>> ===
>>> I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
>>> available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
>>>
>>> The
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:00:48PM -0400, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>On 28/03/2012 6:43 PM, JonY wrote:
>> On 3/29/2012 04:21, Brian Wilson wrote:
> I hope it doesn't leave the system in an unusable state if some DLL is
> still in use.
I may be wrong but I'm nearly certain that has been Cori
On 28/03/2012 6:43 PM, JonY wrote:
On 3/29/2012 04:21, Brian Wilson wrote:
I hope it doesn't leave the system in an unusable state if some DLL is
still in use.
I may be wrong but I'm nearly certain that has been Corinna's goal from
the start. She is sometimes just a little too M. A lot of her
On 3/29/2012 04:21, Brian Wilson wrote:
>>> I hope it doesn't leave the system in an unusable state if some DLL is
>>> still in use.
>>
>> I may be wrong but I'm nearly certain that has been Corinna's goal from
>> the start. She is sometimes just a little too M. A lot of her
>> seemingly tireless
> >I hope it doesn't leave the system in an unusable state if some DLL is
> >still in use.
>
> I may be wrong but I'm nearly certain that has been Corinna's goal from
> the start. She is sometimes just a little too M. A lot of her
> seemingly tireless efforts in getting Cygwin working are actual
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 06:39:22PM +0800, JonY wrote:
>I hope it doesn't leave the system in an unusable state if some DLL is
>still in use.
I may be wrong but I'm nearly certain that has been Corinna's goal from
the start. She is sometimes just a little too M. A lot of her
seemingly tireless ef
On 3/28/2012 20:09, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 28 18:39, JonY wrote:
>> On 3/28/2012 15:33, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Mar 28 07:27, JonY wrote:
On 3/27/2012 16:36, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
>
On Mar 28 18:39, JonY wrote:
> On 3/28/2012 15:33, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Mar 28 07:27, JonY wrote:
> >> On 3/27/2012 16:36, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>> On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> > New News:
> > ===
> > I hav
On 3/28/2012 15:33, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 28 07:27, JonY wrote:
>> On 3/27/2012 16:36, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> New News:
> ===
> I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1.
On Mar 28 07:27, JonY wrote:
> On 3/27/2012 16:36, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> >> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >>> New News:
> >>> ===
> >>> I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
> >>> available on a Cyg
On 3/27/2012 16:36, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
>>> New News:
>>> ===
>>> I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
>>> available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
>>>
>>> The fo
On 3/27/2012 4:46 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 27 15:12, Ken Brown wrote:
On 3/27/2012 2:48 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 27 14:32, Ken Brown wrote:
The following DLLs couldn't be rebased because they were in use:
/usr/lib/gio/modules/cygdconfsettings.dll
[...]
/usr/bin/cyg
On Mar 27 15:12, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 3/27/2012 2:48 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Mar 27 14:32, Ken Brown wrote:
> >>The following DLLs couldn't be rebased because they were in use:
> >> /usr/lib/gio/modules/cygdconfsettings.dll
> >> [...]
> >> /usr/bin/cygICE-6.dll
> >>2012/03/27 13:48
On Mar 27 09:35, Karl M wrote:
>
>
>
> > Can it at least complain about in-use files?
>
> It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
> has no window to do output to.
>
>
> But setup will still alert the user about running cygwin processes, true?
I wasn't aware t
On Mar 27 14:32, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 3/27/2012 2:20 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Mar 27 14:01, Ken Brown wrote:
> >>I just tried it, and the list of DLLs that couldn't be rebased does
> >>indeed appear in setup.log.full. I also get a warning from
> >>setup.exe about the exit code of autoreb
On 3/27/2012 2:20 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 27 14:01, Ken Brown wrote:
I just tried it, and the list of DLLs that couldn't be rebased does
indeed appear in setup.log.full. I also get a warning from
setup.exe about the exit code of autorebase.bat, which some users
might interpret as mea
On Mar 27 14:01, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 3/27/2012 1:16 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Mar 27 09:35, Karl M wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Can it at least complain about in-use files?
> >>
> >>It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
> >>has no window to do output to.
> >>
>
On 3/27/2012 1:16 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 27 09:35, Karl M wrote:
Can it at least complain about in-use files?
It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
has no window to do output to.
But setup will still alert the user about running cygwin processes,
On Mar 27 09:35, Karl M wrote:
>
>
>
> > Can it at least complain about in-use files?
>
> It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
> has no window to do output to.
>
>
> But setup will still alert the user about running cygwin processes, true?
I wasn't aware that
[Please invest in a mailer which does proper quoting]
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:35:38AM -0700, Karl M wrote:
>Corinna wrote:
>>> Can it at least complain about in-use files?
>
>>It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
>>has no window to do output to.
>
>But setup will
> Can it at least complain about in-use files?
It does in the setup.log output. Other than that, it can't since it
has no window to do output to.
But setup will still alert the user about running cygwin processes, true?
Thanks,
...Karl
--
On Mar 27 09:09, Karl M wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mar 27 11:18, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> > The problem
> > right now -- at least in my naive invocations -- is that rebaseall
> > attempts to rebase things which are in-use. Perhaps the initial
> > in-sync-ness check opens the file in exclusive mode and fails
On Mar 27 11:18, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> The problem
> right now -- at least in my naive invocations -- is that rebaseall
> attempts to rebase things which are in-use. Perhaps the initial
> in-sync-ness check opens the file in exclusive mode and fails? I
> know the in-use files were still in sync
On 27/03/2012 11:29 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 27 11:18, Ryan Johnson wrote:
The problem
right now -- at least in my naive invocations -- is that rebaseall
attempts to rebase things which are in-use. Perhaps the initial
in-sync-ness check opens the file in exclusive mode and fails? I
k
On Mar 27 11:18, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> The problem
> right now -- at least in my naive invocations -- is that rebaseall
> attempts to rebase things which are in-use. Perhaps the initial
> in-sync-ness check opens the file in exclusive mode and fails? I
> know the in-use files were still in sync be
On 27/03/2012 4:36 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
New News:
===
I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
The following are the chang
On 27/03/2012 7:40 AM, Michael Lutz wrote:
Am 27.03.2012 10:36 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
Needless to say that the ultimately most efficient way would be
to find a method to avoid rebase problems after fork at all. The
last attempt at it looked promising at first, but then again...
http://social
Am 27.03.2012 10:36 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> Needless to say that the ultimately most efficient way would be
> to find a method to avoid rebase problems after fork at all. The
> last attempt at it looked promising at first, but then again...
> http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/windo
On Mar 26 22:59, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >New News:
> >===
> >I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
> >available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
> >
> >The following are the changes since the previous release:
On 26/03/2012 9:40 PM, Jason Tishler wrote:
New News:
===
I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
The following are the changes since the previous release:
* Add rebase/rebaseall touch file (i.e., -t optio
New News:
===
I have updated the version of rebase to 4.1.0-1. The tarballs should be
available on a Cygwin mirror near you shortly.
The following are the changes since the previous release:
* Add rebase/rebaseall touch file (i.e., -t option) support.
* Add rebaseall setup (i.e., -
32 matches
Mail list logo
