Mail Archives: cygwin/2007/08/20/12:42:10
> On Aug 20 16:20, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 20 August 2007 15:49, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> >>> On 19 August 2007 20:22, Aaron Gray wrote:
>> > AFACT this actually looks like a Vista problem.
>> > [...]
>> Hm, that sounds like a file that you have write but not delete
>> permissions
>> to.
>>
>> > Can someone look into this please,
>>
>> Well, just to state the obvious, /you/ would be the most ideally-placed
>> person to do so.
>>
>> I don't even have Vista, so I'm kinda ruled out there, but I'd take a
>> look
>> at the perms and ACLs of conftest.dir and the existing depcomp file in
>> there,
>> using both 'getfacl' to show cygwin's view of the posix-style perms, and
>> 'cacls' to compare with windoze's opinion.
>>
>> BTW, you didn't by any chance use winzip to unpack the tarball did you?
No.
> Apart from that, the file permission settings are the same in Vista
> compared to older OSes. The exception is the UAC stuff which could
> result in some executables having less permissions than usual, if, for
> instance, Internet Explorer has been used to download the executable.
> We can hopefully rule this out here, so it's just some permission
> problem which has nothing to do with the base OS.
Works fine on XP. The only things that are diferent are the Cygwin
instillation and Vista.
> Note: Not all
> problems on Vista are Vista's (or, FWIW, Cygwin's) fault. See, for
> example http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PEBCAK for one possible explanation
> of the problem.
Nice reply :)
Does look like a case of PEBCAK.
Unmodified GCC 4.2.0 compiles okay, but when modified cracks appear, only on
Vista though, XP is okay. So must be something to do with permissions.
Aaron
--
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 -