Randall
> >Well, 0666 does not seem like a good idea, since it gives
> everyone the
> >right to change the files. Of course the main use of umask
> is to restrict
> >access from group and other.
>
> It's a very good idea and has been "the right way" (or, to use a
> now-archaic phrase, "The Uni
Michael,
At 09:52 2002-11-12, Eriksson, Michael wrote:
Randall
>
> Perhaps the package search page would benefit from a hint about appending
> ".exe" when looking for command names that are (expected to be) binary
> executables? Of course, doing so would prevent seeing scripts and symlinks.
Tha
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> Michael,
>
> At 05:28 2002-11-12, Eriksson, Michael wrote:
> >Max,
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > Re install the relevant packages.
> > > http://cygwin.com/packages/ if you don't
> > > know which the relvant packages are.
> >
> >I have lo
Michael,
At 05:28 2002-11-12, Eriksson, Michael wrote:
Max,
> > Hi,
> >
> > ...
>
> Re install the relevant packages.
> http://cygwin.com/packages/ if you don't
> know which the relvant packages are.
I have looked there already, but it is not obvious to me what packages
would be
relevant. (Neit
Max,
> > Hi,
> >
> > after updating my cygwin installation on Friday (with repeated
> > re-updates on Monday) I have several problems.
> >
> > 1) Several commands (at least cat and fold) are missing, even if the
> > man pages are still there. Both the download and installations where
> > (eventuall
Eriksson, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after updating my cygwin installation on Friday (with repeated
> re-updates on Monday) I have several problems.
>
> 1) Several commands (at least cat and fold) are missing, even if the
> man pages are still there. Both the download and install
6 matches
Mail list logo
