Re: Latest setup.exe not code-signed?

2016-12-15 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, Kal Sze! > It looks like the new setup-x86_64.exe is not code-signed? Is that on > purpose? IIRC, the previous versions were code-signed. No. > Do we now only > rely on the .sig signature file to verify it? Been like that all the time. -- With best regards, Andrey Repin Thursday,

Re: Latest setup.exe not code-signed?

2016-12-15 Thread Ismail Donmez
Hello, On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Kal Sze wrote: > 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? It was never code signed and the reaso

RE: Latest setup.exe issue

2005-12-25 Thread Milan Reznicek
Thanks, Milan Řezníček -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Dessent Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 12:53 PM To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Latest setup.exe issue Milan Reznicek wrote: > I found a minor problem with lat

Re: Latest setup.exe issue

2005-12-25 Thread Brian Dessent
Milan Reznicek wrote: > I found a minor problem with latest setup.exe I downloaded today in > the morning. It doesn't care about colors being set as default by This has been fixed for some time. The fix is in the current setup.exe snapshot but the last release version was made before the

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-10 Thread Robert Collins
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 03:56, Joseph Davida wrote: > I got around the problem by removing the > old C:\cygwin (actually by renaming it > to cygwin.old) and restarting the setup.exe. > > So it appears current setup.exe will cause this > problem on Win2K if it installs on top of an > exsisting insta

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-09 Thread Joseph Davida
Nop! package dir is c:\downloads\cygwin\packages. Joe --- Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 03:56, Joseph Davida wrote: > > I got around the problem by removing the > > old C:\cygwin (actually by renaming it > > to cygwin.old) and restarting the setup.exe. > > >

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-08 Thread Joseph Davida
I got around the problem by removing the old C:\cygwin (actually by renaming it to cygwin.old) and restarting the setup.exe. So it appears current setup.exe will cause this problem on Win2K if it installs on top of an exsisting installation. Cheers, Joe Joseph Davida wrote: >I tried the beta v

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-06 Thread Joseph I. Davida
I tried the beta version Max suggested and it also exhibits the same behaviour on my win2k laptop; i.e. sucks up huge mem (depletes VM), and yet after more than 1 hour of running, it still says 1% of base-files 1.1-1 is installed. The "total" progress meter shows only about a sliver of "progress" :

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-06 Thread Max Bowsher
Please keep replies on list! Joseph I. Davida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It appears that this setup.exe is depleting the VM pool. > There is either a bad memory leak problem, or there > is a boundless recursion in the calls. I suspect the > it is a memory leak problem. > The machine has 512M sd

Re: Latest setup.exe

2002-12-05 Thread Max Bowsher
Joseph I. Davida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The latest setup.exe dies with the following Latest release (2.249.2.5) or latest beta (2.303) ? > error banner titled: Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Error > > Runtime Error > Program: C:\download\cygwin\setup.exe > > Abnormal Program termination >

Re: Latest Setup.exe Fails (Win2k)

2002-05-15 Thread Jonathan Sambrook
Lee Goddard wrote: > > Sorry - forgot the obvious: it is the latest version at the > time of writing, which is 2.218.2.8. > > > > >> > >> > Hi there. >> > >> > The latest setup.exe fails on my system: 100% CPU indefinetly >> > and all the screen says is something like 'this space >> > intentio

Re: Latest Setup.exe Fails (Win2k)

2002-05-15 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 02:53:30PM +0200, Lee Goddard wrote: >In every case, the systsem hangs with the dialogue box saying >"This space intentionally blank" (or such) and the window is shown >as "Not responding" in Windows' task manager, with 100% use >of a 1400 mhz CPU. I hate to chime in wit

RE: Latest Setup.exe Fails (Win2k)

2002-05-15 Thread Lee Goddard
Sorry - forgot the obvious: it is the latest version at the time of writing, which is 2.218.2.8. > > > > > Hi there. > > > > The latest setup.exe fails on my system: 100% CPU indefinetly > > and all the screen says is something like 'this space > > intentionally blank.' I've tried 10 different

RE: Latest Setup.exe Fails (Win2k)

2002-05-15 Thread Robert Collins
Please quote the setup.exe version number when reporting bugs! Rob > -Original Message- > From: Lee Goddard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:03 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Latest Setup.exe Fails (Win2k) > > > Hi there. > > The latest setup.exe fa