X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_41,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject:  Re: [1.7] rebaseall doesn't solve the problem
Date:  Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:38:51 -0500
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <gp6c48$prf$1@ger.gmane.org>
References:  <499F6682.1090204@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20090224100616.GC6035@calimero.vinschen.de> <49A85971.6070300@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20090228104337.GG19887@calimero.vinschen.de> <49A986B4.2080501@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20090228201625.GA8503@calimero.vinschen.de> <49A9AA0C.9020904@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20090301102035.GB10046@calimero.vinschen.de> <gp4cb8$boh$1@ger.gmane.org> <49B66C43.3050203@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20090105 Fedora/2.0.0.19-1.fc10 Thunderbird/2.0.0.19 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
In-Reply-To: <49B66C43.3050203@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie.com@cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

Charles Wilson wrote:
> Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Feb 28 16:18, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>> I'm open to suggestions.  "peimgflags"?  Currently, aslr only
>>> peflags?
>> $0.02 from a mostly-lurker-these-days: chpe{h,hdr,header,f,flags}? That
>> way it's a verb instead of a noun...
>>
> 
> ....except that the utility can also be used to display the flag values,
> as well. So 'ch*' (as in 'change*') isn't very accurate, either.

Yes, I found that after I'd sent the above :-). Ah, well.

If the command is 'peflags --set-<blah>' (as is the case currently 
IIUC), I think that's fine.

-- 
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
-- 
"Still the prettiest." -- Legolas
(as quoted in The Very Secret Diaries by Cassandra Claire)
http://www.ealasaid.com/misc/vsd/


--
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/