On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Cary R. wrote:
>
> From: NightStrike
> Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 1:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Maintainers please weigh in on 64-bit Cygwin
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> On 17 March 2013 13:45, Christoph
On 17 March 2013 14:36, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
> I also lack a 64-bit Windows OS, but I believe you can download a time
> limited trial of Windows8 in 64-bit?
Looked in to a it a little further, and it turns out a trial is available:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-ca/evalcenter/jj554510.aspx
Unfor
On 17 March 2013 16:36, NightStrike wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> On 17 March 2013 13:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> You certainly could but that would mean that you'd be releasing untested
>>> software for 64-bit. Is that something that we want to endorse
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 07:32:37PM +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
>Christopher Faylor writes:
>> Have you considered the implications of having someone else do your
>> packages? That means potentially different setup.hint, potentially
>> different versions and version-numbering schemes, and possible
>>
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 18:43:52 +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
> My working assumption is that the differences between the two
> architectures can nearly be absorbed by cygport so that a single
> definition can be used to produce both packages. I also hope that it
> will be possible in the future to cross
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 13:58:10 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Btw, was it announced that Yaakov was working on a complete 64-bit
> release? I knew that this was a possibility but was it actually
> announced that there would be a release area in cygwin's ftp area with
> packages (presumably) buil
On 2013-03-17 17:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I'd like to have a feel for how the 64-bit version of Cygwin will
> impact package maintainers.
>
> So, I'd appreciate some discussion about this.
1. yes, I have Win64
2. n/a
3. yes, I'm already done porting, I'm just waiting for optional
depend
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
> On 17 March 2013 13:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> You certainly could but that would mean that you'd be releasing untested
>> software for 64-bit. Is that something that we want to endorse or should
>> we have some way of validating thi
On 3/17/2013 5:43 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:35:46AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Mar 17 02:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
If we're going to do that then I'd like the actual maintainers to start
generating packages rather than random other people. Otherwise ch
On 3/17/2013 5:45 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I'd like to have a feel for how the 64-bit version of Cygwin will
impact package maintainers.
So, I'd appreciate some discussion about this.
1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
2) If no, would you be willing to install one?
3)
On 17 March 2013 13:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> You certainly could but that would mean that you'd be releasing untested
> software for 64-bit. Is that something that we want to endorse or should
> we have some way of validating this.
This brings up an interesting point, in that I don't have
Christopher Faylor writes:
> Have you considered the implications of having someone else do your
> packages? That means potentially different setup.hint, potentially
> different versions and version-numbering schemes, and possible
> source-level patches which you have not touched.
My (maybe fault
On 17/03/13 17:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
If we could (this is just pie-in-the-sky speculating) drum up funding
for a 64-bit version of Windows would you be willing to install it?
I'm just in the throws of putting together a new PC right now - a big
Fedora 18 / Win7 / WinXP multiboot. Sadly
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:35:46AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Mar 17 02:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> If we're going to do that then I'd like the actual maintainers to start
>> generating packages rather than random other people. Otherwise chaos
>> will ensue.
>
>I didn't know Yaakov is
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 06:43:52PM +0100, Achim Gratz wrote:
>> 1) Yes.
>> 2) N/A
>> 3) Yes (but not in the next two or three weeks).
>> 4) No.
>> 5) No.
>> 6) Yes, as long as they don't pretend to be me.
>> 7) Yes, if that helps to speed up things.
>
>My working assumption is that the differences
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 05:42:53PM +, David Stacey wrote:
>On 17/03/13 16:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
>>
>> 2) If no, would you be willing to install one?
>>
>> 3) Are you willing to download the current 64-bit Cygwin and start porting
> 1) Yes.
> 2) N/A
> 3) Yes (but not in the next two or three weeks).
> 4) No.
> 5) No.
> 6) Yes, as long as they don't pretend to be me.
> 7) Yes, if that helps to speed up things.
My working assumption is that the differences between the two
architectures can nearly be absorbed by cygport so tha
On 17/03/13 16:45, Christopher Faylor wrote:
1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
2) If no, would you be willing to install one?
3) Are you willing to download the current 64-bit Cygwin and start porting
your stuff, knowing that there are still bugs?
4) Or, would you rather wa
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 05:54:13PM +0100, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>(Do you want all responses to the list in this case?)
Unless you have something you want to say which you'd rather not have
archived on the list, yes.
Otherwise, send me personal email to me at-sign cgf period cx.
cgf
On 3/17/2013 12:45 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
Yes.
2) If no, would you be willing to install one?
N/A
3) Are you willing to download the current 64-bit Cygwin and start porting
your stuff, knowing that there are still bugs?
Yes.
On 3/17/2013 9:45 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I'd like to have a feel for how the 64-bit version of Cygwin will
> impact package maintainers.
>
> So, I'd appreciate some discussion about this.
>
> 1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
>
> 2) If no, would you be willing to ins
Am 17.03.2013 17:45, schrieb Christopher Faylor:
I'd like to have a feel for how the 64-bit version of Cygwin will
impact package maintainers.
So, I'd appreciate some discussion about this.
1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
yes
3) Are you willing to download the current 64
I'd like to have a feel for how the 64-bit version of Cygwin will
impact package maintainers.
So, I'd appreciate some discussion about this.
1) Do you have a 64-bit version of Windows available?
2) If no, would you be willing to install one?
3) Are you willing to download the current 64-bit Cyg
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:35:46AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Mar 17 02:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> If we're going to do that then I'd like the actual maintainers to start
>> generating packages rather than random other people. Otherwise chaos
>> will ensue.
>
>I didn't know Yaakov is
On Mar 17 02:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 12:28:47AM -0500, Yaakov wrote:
> >On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 07:08:01 +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
> >>how far we are from the 64bit setup release ?
> >>
> >>I miss the dependency check of cygport ;-)
> >
> >The setup code is ready to shi
25 matches
Mail list logo
