> >They have the right. Everything should be cleared tomorrow. Can I fax you
> >the assignment form?
>
> It doesn't go to me. Please send it to the address mentioned on
> the assignment
> page.
OK, I'll snail it.
Karsten
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 01:47:01AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>> As long as the person thinks they have the right to send the
>> message, I'm happy.
>
>They have the right. Everything should be cleared tomorrow. Can I fax you
>the assignment form?
It doesn't go to me. Please send it to the
> As long as the person thinks they have the right to send the
> message, I'm happy.
They have the right. Everything should be cleared tomorrow. Can I fax you
the assignment form?
Karsten
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.co
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 05:45:16PM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>> I'm just asking for assurances.
>>
>> Can you get someone from AT&T to send email here saying that they have
>> no interest in your changes? That + your assignment will be enough for
>> me.
>
>Glenn Fowler and David Korn will p
> I'm just asking for assurances.
>
> Can you get someone from AT&T to send email here saying that they have
> no interest in your changes? That + your assignment will be enough for
> me.
Glenn Fowler and David Korn will prepare a message. Is that OK? Or must an
AT&T lawyer be involved?
Karsten
On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 12:54:17AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>>I would *really* like to get something official from AT&T if you were
>>actually working for them, too.
>
>OK, I triggered this. I'll be quiet now.
I'm just asking for assurances.
Can you get someone from AT&T to send email he
> I would *really* like to get something official from AT&T if you were
> actually working for them, too.
OK, I triggered this.
I'll be quiet now.
Karsten
P.S.: I gave you some clues about real bugs in Cygwin. Maybe someone else
could have a look at those.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cyg
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 08:53:07AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
>> And, I'm sorry but it really looks to me like you'd need a
>> release from
>> AT&T indicating that any patches you provided to us are
>> unemcumbered by
>> this license. I don't see how you can sign away the rights to a
> > All other patches are bug fixes or small corrections to
> make Cygwin behave more consistent.
>
> Yeah, I was talking only about AST related stuff. If a patch
> has nothing to do with AST, go ahead. But be aware that we will
> discuss it and it still could be rejected, of course. That's
>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:50:50AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> > If we just left out that patch we won't have a problem.
>
> OK.
>
> > > Two other patches mimic UWIN behavior. That can not be a
> > problem, since Cygwin also has adopted the UWIN symbolics links.
> >
> > Mimicing is
> If we just left out that patch we won't have a problem.
OK.
> > Two other patches mimic UWIN behavior. That can not be a
> problem, since Cygwin also has adopted the UWIN symbolics links.
>
> Mimicing isn't a problem as long as you didn't look into the
> sources and get the idea from there.
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 08:53:07AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> > And, I'm sorry but it really looks to me like you'd need a
> > release from
> > AT&T indicating that any patches you provided to us are
> > unemcumbered by
> > this license. I don't see how you can sign away the rights
> And, I'm sorry but it really looks to me like you'd need a
> release from
> AT&T indicating that any patches you provided to us are
> unemcumbered by
> this license. I don't see how you can sign away the rights to any
> patches that you make if you have been working on code that is covered
>
===
- Original Message -
From: "Corinna Vinschen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Now, the pagesize on Windows is 4K. If the file size is
coincidentally
> 4096 or 8192 or any other multiple of 4K, gcc knows that it has to
> fallback to it's "slow" method since getpagesize() has returned the
> cor
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 09:32:57PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Corinna Vinschen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > mmap (MapViewOfFile resp.) alwaus map whole pages. A page is 4096
> > bytes long.
> >
> > If a file is, say, 8190 bytes, then we have a two page map
- Original Message -
From: "Corinna Vinschen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> mmap (MapViewOfFile resp.) alwaus map whole pages. A page is 4096
> bytes long.
>
> If a file is, say, 8190 bytes, then we have a two page map, size 8192.
> So we have two trailing 0 bytes. If getpagesize() returns 4096
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> Of Karsten Fleischer
>
> It's not a major change.
> SUSv2 doesn't say that you have to use /bin/sh for a shell. It even says
> that $SHELL can name the user's favorite shell.
> I know that you always have
- Original Message -
From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'll stop apologizing for this after this message but I will reiterate
> that I don't like this. I do get asked about this kind of thing all
of
> the time within and without Red Hat, though. I don't want to be in a
> p
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 08:31:49PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 02:03:43AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>>> I'm not sure but I don't think it matters if the sources are
>>> proprietary. Maybe this is getting incredibly picky but if you adapted
>>> algorithms from o
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 02:04:47AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>It's not a major change. SUSv2 doesn't say that you have to use
>/bin/sh for a shell. It even says that $SHELL can name the user's
>favorite shell.
Every UNIX system that I've ever seen uses /bin/sh. The SUSv2 says that
system
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 02:03:44AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm checking on this internally now.
>
>Please do so.
I will.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwi
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 02:03:43AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>> I'm not sure but I don't think it matters if the sources are
>> proprietary. Maybe this is getting incredibly picky but if you adapted
>> algorithms from other non-GPL compliant programs then that is probably
>> an issue, too.
> >>OK, more detailed. I allow only absolute pathes in $SHELL and don't
> >>allow any *csh. If superuser then only shells from [/usr][/local]/bin
> >>are considered trusted shells. If not superuser shells from other
> >>directories are allowed, but if uid != euid or gid != egid the shell
> >>an
> I'm not sure but I don't think it matters if the sources are
> proprietary. Maybe this is getting incredibly picky but if you adapted
> algorithms from other non-GPL compliant programs then that is probably
> an issue, too.
I don't know if something like "If the first four bytes of a file are
> FWIW, I'm checking on this internally now.
Please do so.
Karsten
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 01:40:19PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:18:04AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
>>>If you've actually looked at the UWIN sources, this is not enough.
>>>IANAL either, but I believe that this means you've been tainted. That
>>>means tha
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 03:37:41PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:13:01AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
>>Glenn found some test cases where mmap() failed and has also written a
>>nice test program. I will get this to you later. He also states that
>>the value
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:18:04AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
>>If you've actually looked at the UWIN sources, this is not enough.
>>IANAL either, but I believe that this means you've been tainted. That
>>means that we can't use your patches. Sorry.
>
>I've never had the chance to loo
> If you've actually looked at the UWIN sources, this is not
> enough. IANAL
> either, but I believe that this means you've been tainted. That means
> that we can't use your patches. Sorry.
I've never had the chance to look at the UWIN sources. It's proprietary.
As I said before, the UWIN dev
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 05:03:26PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> , so I've rewritten the code from memory after looking at the sources.
>> The differences are substancial, so no problem here either.
>
>I think that's ok. "Rewritten" should be enough. IANAL, IANAL, ...
If you've actually loo
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 02:45:51PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> Is it OK to send patches to 1.3.3-2 or should I move them to 1.3.6 first?
>
>I would suggest to move them to the latest from CVS. If you're
>always working against the latest from CVS you don't get hit too
>much by changes from
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 10:50:46AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> > http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ntsec.html
> >
> > It's rather old and a bit badly maintained but it's basically still
> > correct.
>
> I've read it a long time ago...
I'm feeling flattered. :-)
> > One general ques
> The problem is that by default the "Everyone" group has the uid and
> gid 0. The user can change that in the passwd and group files.
OK, I'll take that out again then.
> You just should stick with uid/gid 18 for the user SYSTEM. Are you
> familar with the NT security concept? If you want to
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 04:28:54PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ntsec.html
>
> It's rather old and a bit badly maintained but it's basically still
> correct.
Unfortunately, it doesn't contain any word about the ability to change
user context w/o password
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 10:09:59AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> > But, uhm, what exactly is a `superuser' from your point of view?
> > We don't have that concept except for SYSTEM as _the_ user which
> > is able to change user context w/o changing security policies.
> > And on 9x/Me...
> > Glenn found some test cases where mmap() failed and has
> also written a nice test program. I will get this to you later.
> > He also states that the value returned by getpagesize()
> must conform to mmap() alignment by definition in the SUSv2.
> I'm not quite sure about that, though.
>
>
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:13:01AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> > > It's a whole bunch of small fixes. I think I need to fill
> > out the assignment form.
> >
> > Yeah, please send it as soon as possible since you'll have to send
> > it by snail mail. Sometimes it takes two to three
> > It's a whole bunch of small fixes. I think I need to fill
> out the assignment form.
>
> Yeah, please send it as soon as possible since you'll have to send
> it by snail mail. Sometimes it takes two to three weeks for some
> reason.
OK, I'll fill it out later today.
> > Is it OK to send p
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:54:06AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Corinna Vinschen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > - getpagesize() should return a value compatible with mmap(), that
> is dwAllocGranularity (65536) instead of dwPageSize (1024).
> >
> > We discussed
- Original Message -
From: "Corinna Vinschen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > - getpagesize() should return a value compatible with mmap(), that
is dwAllocGranularity (65536) instead of dwPageSize (1024).
>
> We discussed that months ago. I think we're not going to change that
> (it's 4096, not 1
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:59:12AM -0500, Fleischer, Karsten (K.) wrote:
> It's a whole bunch of small fixes. I think I need to fill out the assignment form.
Yeah, please send it as soon as possible since you'll have to send
it by snail mail. Sometimes it takes two to three weeks for some
reason
> >I know about that.
>
> Ok. Then that's the way to go. Just follow the procedures in
> http://cygwin.com/contrib.html . If your fix is big you'll
> need to fill
> out an assignment form as that web page mentions.
It's a whole bunch of small fixes. I think I need to fill out the assignment
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 02:25:53AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>> Sorry. That's not how it works.
>>
>> If you have patches to provide, check out the cygwin web page. Click on
>> the "Contributing" link.
>
>I know about that.
Ok. Then that's the way to go. Just follow the procedures in
ht
I hope you think again. It's a very bad idea.
Sorry, that was not my intention. Never.
I've put a lot of work into my fixes, but Cygwin development went off too
fast for me to keep up pace.
There's already a great interest in having ksh on Cygwin at Bell Labs. I'm
inter
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 01:50:46AM +0100, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
>Hi Cygwin folks,
>
>having seen some references to pdksh on the list today I think I must have a
>"coming out" now.
>I've been working with David Korn and Glenn Fowler some weeks ago to get the
>real ksh93 and all the other AT&T s
Hi Cygwin folks,
having seen some references to pdksh on the list today I think I must have a
"coming out" now.
I've been working with David Korn and Glenn Fowler some weeks ago to get the
real ksh93 and all the other AT&T stuff (AST libraries and tools) going on
Cygwin.
There are still some prob
46 matches
Mail list logo
