Re: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:12:29AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > >Now, does anyone care to package it? ;-) > > Haven't I already vetoed this once? > cgf Not that I recall. I believe you vetoed cgdb (as Ronald Landheer-Cieslak mentioned already)

Re: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:44:27AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:27:49AM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: > >cgf wrote: > >>Haven't I already vetoed this once? > > > >Have you? I searched the cygwin, cygwin-xfree, and cygwin-apps mailing > >list archives for ddd, read

Re: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:27:49AM -0400, Richard Campbell wrote: >cgf wrote: >>Haven't I already vetoed this once? > >Have you? I searched the cygwin, cygwin-xfree, and cygwin-apps mailing >list archives for ddd, read all messages from you, back 2 years on the >cygwin list and for all time on the

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 04:43:48PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: >On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:29:10AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:59:06AM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: >>>Personally, I'm not that interested in ddd, but next time, before going >>>thro

RE: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

cgf wrote: > >Haven't I already vetoed this once? Have you? I searched the cygwin, cygwin-xfree, and cygwin-apps mailing list archives for ddd, read all messages from you, back 2 years on the cygwin list and for all time on the other two, and I see no veto from you for ddd. Where should I hav

Re: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:12:29AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: >Now, does anyone care to package it? ;-) Haven't I already vetoed this once? cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: ht

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:29:10AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:59:06AM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: > >Personally, I'm not that interested in ddd, but next time, before going > >through packaging, I will ask on the -apps list whether the package > >will be

Re: DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Richard Campbell wrote: > I was just able to build DDD 3.3.7 from sourceforge out of the box, > and was able to attach and step through a simple hello world program > with it. > > Caveats: > 1) I haven't upgraded to cygwin 1.5 yet. > 2) I have every cygwin binary package setup

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:59:06AM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote: >Personally, I'm not that interested in ddd, but next time, before going >through packaging, I will ask on the -apps list whether the package >will be vetoed.. just to make sure I don't package for nothing. (No >hard feeling

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:24:00PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > One way to help all those people and minimize the number of such queries > is to contribute DDD as a Cygwin package and volunteer to maintain it, so > that it can be installed using Cygwin setup. See the Package > Contributor's G

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

Thank you andrew, I found out that the xfree86-prog package need to be installed. The default XFree86 does not install those things. The reason for me to use DDD is because I am trying to use the gdb for palmos. Of course insight will be good for C program debugging. But there are needs to run o

DDD 3.3.7 compiles ootb (was - RE: DDD 3.3.5 success)

I was just able to build DDD 3.3.7 from sourceforge out of the box, and was able to attach and step through a simple hello world program with it. Caveats: 1) I haven't upgraded to cygwin 1.5 yet. 2) I have every cygwin binary package setup will let you install installed. 3) The INSTAL

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

James, Please keep communication of this sort on the list unless specifically asked for a private message, so others can find it in the archives. Also, please make sure your mailer honors the Reply-To: field. What I meant was that if (when) you figure out how to compile DDD, the next logical ste

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

One way to help all those people and minimize the number of such queries is to contribute DDD as a Cygwin package and volunteer to maintain it, so that it can be installed using Cygwin setup. See the Package Contributor's Guide at for information on how to become a p

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

i acknowledge you're right. i didn't know it until you mentioned insight when i asked about ddd. but ddd is not only a popular graphical front-end debugger, it's become the debugger of choice for many people, which is -- i daresay -- why the subject keeps coming up. Christopher Faylor wrote: O

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 10:34:24AM -0500, james wrote: The typical response to ddd problems is "Why not just use 'insight'?" that's kind of like saying, "why not just use windows?" i think it's fairly obvious that users would like to have the choice. Most o

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 01:50:42PM -0300, Fr?d?ric L. W. Meunier wrote: >On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, james wrote: >>>The typical response to ddd problems is "Why not just use 'insight'?" >>that's kind of like saying, "why not just use windows?" i think it's >>fairly obvious that users would like to have th

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 10:34:24AM -0500, james wrote: >> The typical response to ddd problems is "Why not just use 'insight'?" >that's kind of like saying, "why not just use windows?" i think it's fairly >obvious that users would like to have the choice. Most of the time when people ask this ques

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, james wrote: > > The typical response to ddd problems is "Why not just use > > 'insight'?" > that's kind of like saying, "why not just use windows?" i > think it's fairly obvious that users would like to have the > choice. Yes. And I suspect others would like to have the choic

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

istopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 8:34 AM Subject: Re: DDD 3.3.5 success > On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 01:29:16AM -0700, Ayamico Hamasaki wrote: > >I have noticed that you have posted a note saying you > >

Re: DDD 3.3.5 success

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 01:29:16AM -0700, Ayamico Hamasaki wrote: >I have noticed that you have posted a note saying you >have installed DDD 3.35 on cygwin. I am interested to >know how do you do that. The typical response to ddd problems is "Why not just use 'insight'?" -- Please use the resource

DDD 3.3.5 success

Hi, I have noticed that you have posted a note saying you have installed DDD 3.35 on cygwin. I am interested to know how do you do that. I have problem compiling it under cygwin. It is complaining it does not have X11 checking for XOpenDisplay in -lX11... no configure: error: The X11 library '-l