Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<000701c21190$9a301380$af7b1f3e@Fergus>
Reply-To:	<fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net>
From:	<fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc:	<fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net>
Subject:	New setup.exe v.2.249.2.2
Date:	Tue, 11 Jun 2002 22:40:27 +0100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

Both http://cygwin.com/setup.exe and
http://cygwin.com/setup-snapshots/setup-2.249.2.2.exe come up with
v.2.249.2.2 as their ID when they are started, but their md5sum's are
different. Is the first-named the later version and therefore the one to
try?
I've tried them both under W98/SE. Unless setup-2.218.2.9-1.src.tar.gz is
Skip'd, I still get "Download incomplete..." followed by "Can't open (null)
..." followed by "Installation incomplete. Check /setup.log.full ...". If it
is Skip'd, things look just fine.
(For me, all the recent afflictions with setup.exe were subsequent to, and
seem to me to be consequent to, this offering.)
Fergus


--
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/

- Raw text -