Jim,
At 19:15 2003-01-30, Jim Kleckner wrote:
Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
At 09:54 PM 1/30/2003, Jim Kleckner wrote:
[snip ]
Thanks! While you have the code in hand, would it be
possible to allow the setup window to be resized?
I'm constantly wanting to see more lines at once...
H
Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
At 09:54 PM 1/30/2003, Jim Kleckner wrote:
[snip ]
Thanks! While you have the code in hand, would it be
possible to allow the setup window to be resized?
I'm constantly wanting to see more lines at once...
Have you been reading the email archives? I th
At 09:54 PM 1/30/2003, Jim Kleckner wrote:
>Max Bowsher wrote:
>
>>William A. Hoffman wrote:
>[snip]
>>>2. Failing that, it would be nice if the setup program had a button that
>>>set all the values to Keep. The problem is that if I want a new
>>>package X, I have to click 20 other packages to K
Max Bowsher wrote:
William A. Hoffman wrote:
[snip]
2. Failing that, it would be nice if the setup program had a button that
set all the values to Keep. The problem is that if I want a new
package X, I have to click 20 other packages to Keep, or risk an
update of everything. There should be
Mark,
At 09:38 2003-01-28, Mark Himsley wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:27:26 -0800 Randall R Schulz wrote:
>>Arthur Dent got an announcement before his home was demolished
>>for a bypass (apologies to those who don't get the HHGTTG reference). :-)
>
>Isn't "hitchhiker" one word? (Even Eudora's m
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:27:26 -0800 Randall R Schulz wrote:
>>Arthur Dent got an announcement before his home was demolished
>>for a bypass (apologies to those who don't get the HHGTTG reference). :-)
>
>Isn't "hitchhiker" one word? (Even Eudora's meager dictionary thinks so.)
Not in this contex
Scott,
At 08:02 2003-01-28, Scott Prive wrote:
...
I don't disagree that the change was "announced". In hindsight, I see
it was. Arthur Dent got an announcement before his home was demolished
for a bypass (apologies to those who don't get the HHGTTG reference). :-)
Isn't "hitchhiker" one wor
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 6:08 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: cygwin Release process
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:54:25PM -0500, Scott Prive wrote:
> >William,
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:54:25PM -0500, Scott Prive wrote:
>William,
>
>The "ntsec" problem by all accounts was a one-time switch that burned a
>lot of people. It seems like a great feature (not completely using it
>myself), and when I upgraded to it I had NO idea of the impending
>change. I sh
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 3:24 PM
> To: Max Bowsher; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Cygwin Release process
>
>
> Well, if I am the only person with this opinion, then you are right.
> I should stop complaining and burn a CD. However, I suspe
I realize it is a volunteer effort, and a good one, it
really makes windows much nicer to work with! I am not
demanding or expecting anything. I am only trying to
start a discussion that could lead to a possible solution.
I think that this could be done without "much" effort, or
the work of a
ces.redhat.com, if someone is interested in
doing this.
For the record, I have no interest in changing anything. DJ and I were
well aware of the fact that the Cygwin release process would be
different from Red Hat or Debian when we instituted the current policy.
I don't see anything particul
Bill, IMO you are missing a key point:
Cygwin is volunteer maintained. No release manager volunteer, and no
stable release maintainer (who will maintain stable packages after they
become stale) have stepped up.
The *only* way you will get a stable release is to:
1) offer to take on all the extr
ch a "debate" in this thread.
Thanks,
Larry
Original Message:
-
From: Max Bowsher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:07:16 -
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cygwin Release process
William A. Hoffman wrote:
> So, from the feed
Well, if I am the only person with this opinion, then you are right.
I should stop complaining and burn a CD. However, I suspect that I am
not alone in wanting a more stable cygwin.It will be hard to prove my
case, as the folks that read this list and post to it, tend to
be more developer ori
William A. Hoffman wrote:
> So, from the feedback I am getting, it really boils down to a "not
> enough people to maintain the feature" issue. I don't think that
> people don't think that a stable release of cygwin would be a bad
> thing, it is just that there
> is no one to maintain it.
>
> The l
Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> The "Keep" button is in the setup CVS already. Try a setup snapshot.
These aren't auto-generated. The latest one doesn't have this in, yet.
Max.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Docu
Bill,
The "Keep" button is in the setup CVS already. Try a setup snapshot. ;-)
There does seem to be a tendency that most of the problems are introduced
when a major new version of a package (*-1) is released. The *-[2-9]
versions are usually bugfixes applied specifically to the Cygwin port of
The new View:Partial does help. I can now easily see what will get updated.
It would be nice if there was a button, that set all of them to keep.
Often times, I want to update only a single package, and that makes it
easier.
So, from the feedback I am getting, it really boils down to a "not en
0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cygwin Release process
What I am suggesting is taking the same approach as Debian.
Each package in Debian is in one of these states:
Stable, Testing, or Unstable.
Stable packages - should work.
Testing packages - working on becoming the next stable version
Unst
William A. Hoffman wrote:
> What I am suggesting is taking the same approach as Debian.
> Each package in Debian is in one of these states:
> Stable, Testing, or Unstable.
>
> Stable packages - should work.
We have this. Its called [curr]
> Testing packages - working on becoming the next stable v
What I am suggesting is taking the same approach as Debian.
Each package in Debian is in one of these states:
Stable, Testing, or Unstable.
Stable packages - should work.
Testing packages - working on becoming the next stable version
Unstable packages - all other packages, might be working towards
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 03:39:46PM -, Steve Fairbairn wrote:
>How cliquey? I reckon us outsiders should make a mass exodus if
>Christopher *in-most-mother-esq-tone-I-can-manage* fails to explain
>himself.
It's simple: Corinna works for me.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml
How cliquey? I reckon us outsiders should make a mass exodus if Christopher
*in-most-mother-esq-tone-I-can-manage* fails to explain himself.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 24 January 2003 15:34
Actually, in a way, I guess I did say it.
cgf
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:55:54AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 04:39:21PM -0500, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>> Is there any way to control the versions of programs you get from setup.exe?
>> The cygwin environment is different on almost every machine at our company.
>> It
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 04:39:21PM -0500, William A. Hoffman wrote:
> Is there any way to control the versions of programs you get from setup.exe?
> The cygwin environment is different on almost every machine at our company.
> It all depends on when you ran the setup program.I have two suggesti
Max,
At 14:10 2003-01-23, Max Bowsher wrote:
Randall R Schulz wrote:
>> 2. Failing that, it would be nice if the setup program had a button
>> that
>> set all the values to Keep. The problem is that if I want a new
>> package X, I have to click 20 other packages to Keep, or risk an
>> update of
Randall R Schulz wrote:
>> 2. Failing that, it would be nice if the setup program had a button
>> that
>> set all the values to Keep. The problem is that if I want a new
>> package X, I have to click 20 other packages to Keep, or risk an
>> update of everything. There should be a way to update o
William,
At 13:39 2003-01-23, William A. Hoffman wrote:
Is there any way to control the versions of programs you get from setup.exe?
The cygwin environment is different on almost every machine at our company.
It all depends on when you ran the setup program.I have two suggestions:
The Cygwi
William A. Hoffman wrote:
> Is there any way to control the versions of programs you get from
> setup.exe? The cygwin environment is different on almost every
> machine at our company. It all depends on when you ran the setup
> program.I have two suggestions:
>
> 1. It would be nice, if there w
Is there any way to control the versions of programs you get from setup.exe?
The cygwin environment is different on almost every machine at our company.
It all depends on when you ran the setup program.I have two suggestions:
1. It would be nice, if there was a cygwin-stable that had a list of
31 matches
Mail list logo
