On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, andrew brian clegg wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
>
> > > That reminds me about an idea I had re. cygcheck results. Is it possible
> > > to set up the listserver to bounce messages that look like they've had a
> > > cygcheck.out pasted inline, so people (u
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
> > That reminds me about an idea I had re. cygcheck results. Is it possible
> > to set up the listserver to bounce messages that look like they've had a
> > cygcheck.out pasted inline, so people (usually Igor ;) ) don't have to
> > keep reeling off t
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, andrew brian clegg wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Perhaps even a bug reporting script that asked the questions you want
> > answered, and ran cygcheck etc. (basically, automating as much of the
> > http://cygwin.com/problems.html procedure as far a
andrew brian clegg wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Perhaps even a bug reporting script that asked the questions you want
> > answered, and ran cygcheck etc. (basically, automating as much of the
> > http://cygwin.com/problems.html procedure as far as possible), mig
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Perhaps even a bug reporting script that asked the questions you want
> answered, and ran cygcheck etc. (basically, automating as much of the
> http://cygwin.com/problems.html procedure as far as possible), might be
> worthwhile.
That reminds me a
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 19:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 16 Jul, Robert Collins wrote:
> > However, a registry entry won't correct this: only the user knows
> > exactly what tool they used, unless we go down some insane DRM style
> > path - and I won't be taking setup down that path.
>
> Y
On 16 Jul, Robert Collins wrote:
> However, a registry entry won't correct this: only the user knows
> exactly what tool they used, unless we go down some insane DRM style
> path - and I won't be taking setup down that path.
You mean, even if setup just recorded whether it had just completed
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 15:43, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:31:00PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >
> >> cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output
> >> from cycheck doesn't include package i
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 03:31:00PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output
>> from cycheck doesn't include package information, then the packages
>> weren't installed via setup.exe.
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> cygcheck -rsv (or cygcheck -c) already implies this. If the output
> from cycheck doesn't include package information, then the packages
> weren't installed via setup.exe.
I've seen at least one script that (badly) reverse engineered setup
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:21:42AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 22 May, Sam Edge wrote:
>> In addition, you are likely to get little help here with any problem
>> unless you installed cygwin via the "official" setup.exe that you can
>> get via the "Install Cygwin now" link on the http:/
11 matches
Mail list logo
