Re: Cygwin problems under Vista (please reply to Vinod)

["Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh at cygwin dot com>]

Tatsuro MATSUOKA wrote:
> Dear Larry Hall
>
> Thanks to Larry for your immdiate reply.
>  
>
> --- "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh@cygwin.com> wrote:
> > I think it's great that you attempted to work with Vinod to help him get a
> > better understanding of things.  But I think you're missing a point here
> > yourself.  No one is "ignoring" him.  If no one has answered, then it's
> > quite possible no one has an answer for him.  I don't think you have to
> > attribute some negative connotation to lack of discussion for any topic
> > on this list.  It's just the way things go sometimes.  But if having
> > someone else on this list responding directly to his previous inquiries
> > would help everybody feel better about things, I can fulfill that role.
>
> Sorry my attitude is not proper.  No answer will a newbie to be disappointed.

I can understand that.  I should also point out that sometimes silence
comes as a result of subject that has been discussed regularly or very
thoroughly.  In those cases, it is nice if people speak up about that but
I mention it merely to remind posters that there is allot of useful
information in the email archives.  While it can sometimes be difficult to
find what you're looking for, it's a great resource to try whenever a
question or issue comes up.

I'm not suggesting that the above applies to this case.  It's just something
that came to mind while reading your reply.

> I'm glad you to reply my posting.  
>
>  
> >   * Rebase isn't automatically invoked by 'setup.exe' because of all of the
> >     following:
> >       1. Nobody has contributed a patch to add it.
> >       2. Rebasing everybody's installation on the off-chance that they
> >          installed packages that would require this operation seems
> >          inefficient.
> >       3. The goal is to resolve this on a per-package basis so that
> >          running rebaseall isn't necessary for anyone.
>
> I have been waiting the reply like the above.  I am not a specialist for the cygwin so I cannot answer
> for it.  I have used  'rebaseall' on my XP computers to the grace be worked by the helps here.  (I
> realyy appreciate that.) I felt that this was not a VISTA specific issue but I cannot answer it
> because my knowledge is not enough for rebasing. 

Your feeling in this case was quite correct.

> >   * Beyond what's already been said on the X issue, I can't add anything.
> >     I don't run Cygwin-X on Vista.  Actually, I don't really ever run Vista.
> >     But since the question revolves around X, I would suggest inquiring on
> >     the Cygwin-X list if this hasn't already been tried.  Of course, if
> >     Vinod tries this, he can expect the same guarantee of a solution that
> >     he gets with the main list.  If that's not sufficient, there's always
> >     the option to buy Red Hat support and then ask them for help.
> I told to  Vinod that I think it is impossible to bind the Xming and the cygwin setup because Xming is
> not a cygwin software.  
> Is this right ?

Correct again.  It's not a goal of this project to be a distributor of other
project's binaries.  Xming does, as you know, distribute their own X server,
which has its own benefits and detriments when compared with Cygwin's
offering.  We certainly don't discourage people from trying Xming's X
server or other project's software (as long as those who try it and have
any problems or questions don't ask here ;-) ).  But Cygwin won't be
distributing this other software.

Clearly there are issues with Cygwin's X package.  The most troublesome ones
all stem from the lack of a maintainer.  If you've read the Cygwin-X list
lately, you know there is someone who has expressed interest in becoming the
maintainer here.  If that does come to pass, then my guess is things will
improve on this front.  Until then, we're stuck with the status quo.  So
if anyone reading this thread would like to help move Cygwin-X into the
21st century, please volunteer.  I expect that even if more than one
maintainer materializes, there's plenty of work to go around. ;-)

> >     But since the question revolves around X, I would suggest inquiring on
> >     the Cygwin-X list if this hasn't already been tried.
>
> This suggestion is really need for Vinod, I think.

Definitely.


--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/