This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: new cygwin package: cgoban
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- To: "Teun Burgers" <a dot rburgers at freeler dot nl>,<cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 18:24:25 +1000
- Subject: RE: new cygwin package: cgoban
Get a new setup.exe from http://www.cygwin.com/setup.exe.
Rob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teun Burgers [mailto:a.rburgers@freeler.nl]
> Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 5:46 PM
> To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: new cygwin package: cgoban
>
>
> I see the original message has led
> to quite some discussion and even a decree.
>
> What is the status on the upload?
> My setup.exe seems to crash on an increasing
> number of mirrors right after download
> of setup.ini. This is the message:
>
> SETUP heeft een algemene beschermingsfout veroorzaakt
> in module USER.EXE op 0004:00005ff0.
>
> (dutch for general protecting fault).
>
> Charles Wilson wrote:
>
> > Similarly, I don't like the restriction that all 'X'-based
> packages go
> > under XFree86/ on sourceware. We don't put inetutils underneath
> > ncurses/. We don't put openssh under openssl/.
>
> And:
>
> > Further, if one accepts that there should be one tree for all X
> > **clients**, you've never stated WHY that single tree must
> be the same
> > one used by the XFree86 packages. They aren't PART of
> XFree86. They
> > just USE XFree86.
>
> I couldn't agree more. Putting them under XFree86 strongly
> suggests that the package would be part of XFree86, and that
> is not the case.
>
> Teun Burgers
>