Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/10/03/10:46:22
DePriest, Jason R. wrote:
> This google search was pretty much worthless when I ran it before I
> sent my message in:
> bash "command not found" site:cygwin.com inurl:ml
If you've STFLA'd, it is good to mention this when asking your question. :-)
> vi did not show any unusual line endings (CR/LF) in /etc/profile
> before I sent my message in
...and you know to look for '(dos)' in the status line, right? Although
as Larry pointed out, this is only reliable if vi[m] is configured a
certain way; ultimately, you might want to just try running d2u on it
regardless of what you *think* the line endings are. (Also, have you
checked that there is not some OTHER script being called at login, say
~/.bash_profile, ~/.bashrc, etc) that has 'bad' line endings?)
> I noticed that the cygcheck output said things weren't there when a
> manual check shows that they are there and that they are in the path
> that cygcheck says it is checking.
>
> For my issue, not the thread hijacking 'make' issue, I do not have a
> dual-core or hyperthreaded system.
Hint: that was satire. ;-)
(And to explain/ruin the inside joke, 'make 3-81' was the previous
problem-that-everyone-reported-without-RTFRN'ing)
> I did read the release notes when they came out. The ANNOUNCE list is
> the only one that I read all the messages for. It did not look like
> it should be causing the issues I am having.
Ok, but again you should have mentioned that in your first e-mail...
Otherwise, as you can see, people jump to the obvious conclusion.
Plus, the more information you give off the bat, the more likely someone
is to notice a problem and come up with a solution.
--
Matthew
"I don't question your existence -- God" (seen on a church billboard)
--
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/
- Raw text -