X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BOTNET,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_RX X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-id: <500878BF.8070507@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:14:39 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cannot Execute urxvt after upgrade References: <5008629D.5090308@redhat.com> <50086E81.9000406@cygwin.com> In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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 7/19/2012 4:42 PM, Aaron Schneider wrote: > On 19/07/2012 22:30, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >> On 7/19/2012 4:15 PM, Aaron Schneider wrote: >>> On 19/07/2012 22:00, K Stahl wrote: >>> >>> I couldn't find any version of urxvt on cygwin's release mirror, so, no >>> packages to start from. >> >> >> >>> Furthermore, for what you are looking for, isn't >>> rxvt pretty much the same? >>> >>> http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-05/msg00078.html >> >> Pretty much, minus the unicode support and some other niceties mentioned >> in the message you quoted above. Of course, stepping back to rxvt puts you >> in the realm of dead code. So if bit-rot is OK with you... ;-) >> > > It results that the package is named rxvt-unicode-X-9.07-1.tar.bz2 but in > the end install binaries that are named urxvt: > > usr/bin/urxvt-X.exe > usr/bin/urxvtc-X.exe > usr/bin/urxvtd-X.exe > > and all of them were compiled on Jan 2010. The non unicode is even older, so > probably everything is broken. I get also the "Bad address" or "unable to > connect to the rxvt-unicode daemon: No such file or directory" errors. Yes, as Eric pointed out, these packages would need to be updated or the old perl libraries would need to be restored to make them work again. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ 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