Using Red Hat digital signing on setup.exe (was Re: Cygwin 1.7.14-2 setup.exe v2.772 broken?)
Larry Hall (Cygwin)
Mon Apr 30 17:41:00 GMT 2012
On 4/30/2012 12:34 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:29:27PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>> On 4/28/2012 8:51 PM, Nick Lowe wrote:
>>> "I installed 2.772 on my systems as soon as it was available and I
>>> don't see any such issue using my local mirror. Did you try another
>>> Quite, but the idea of corruption was implicit in that question. A
>>> digital signature would rule that out.
>> Not in this case, no. You inferred the wrong thing from the quote
>> above. Corinna's suggestion was that the mirror containing the packages
>> was malformed in some way, not that that 'setup.exe' itself was
>> somehow corrupted.
>>> What's with the hostility? It's really bad etiquette... ;)
>> That would be<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#WJM>. It makes life more
>> livable. :-)
> Or, it could also be that hostility was inexplicably inferred where
> none was intended, i.e., "We're communicating on the internet!"
Oh, THAT. Yeah, it could just be that. ;-)
But seriously, yes. I know I didn't read any hostility in your reply.
My response was a (very) roundabout way of saying that. The smiley was
clearly too subtle. :-( Sorry 'bout that.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
More information about the Cygwin