X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4B32B21F.3060004@cygwin.com> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 19:13:19 -0500 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Upgrade from 1.5.25 to 1.7.1 fails. References: <20091223235333.00B2A1A9838@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20091223235333.00B2A1A9838@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On 12/23/2009 06:53 PM, Harry G McGavran Jr wrote: > >> On 12/23/2009 05:15 PM, Harry G McGavran Jr wrote: >>> >>> 2. Is this a local or network drive? >>> >>> Local -- FAT32 >>> >> >> I'm going to guess this is the problem. Any chance you can try again and >> point to a NTFS formatted partition? > > Yes, that fixed it. I'd sure like to be able to keep my package > directory on the FAT32 partition. Is there any chance that > will ever work again? It worked fine with 1.5.25. And "setup.exe" has undergone allot of work since the 1.5.25 days too. AFAIK, no one was consciously disabling FAT32 drives for "setup.exe" so in that respect, I would expect that this could be rectified. But Cygwin itself is more and more restricted by the lack of permissions on FAT and FAT32 partitions, so there is an argument to be made for not spending allot of time maintaining these less capable formats in "setup.exe" either. That said, I'm sure your report and the information you've provided while narrowing this down with me will be helpful in looking at the problem. And I'm sure any patch that addresses it will get serious attention. I can't say that I'll be the one providing such a patch but if I get some time, I will look into it. That statement shouldn't stop someone else from doing the same though. :-) Thanks again for helping track down the specifics here. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > 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 FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple