Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20021022140650.01a838d8@pop.nycap.rr.com>
X-Sender: billlist AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 14:15:22 -0400
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "William A. Hoffman" <billlist AT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
Subject: Re: Invalid arugment and IO Error with bunzip2
In-Reply-To: <20021022175508.GI514@redhat.com>
References: <5 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20021022130646 DOT 03ccbd70 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
 <5 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20021022114029 DOT 03cdfe90 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
 <5 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20021022114029 DOT 03cdfe90 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
 <5 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20021022130646 DOT 03ccbd70 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 01:55 PM 10/22/2002 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:

>>
>>That is not what I saw.   After doing 1, most cygwin things worked, however, there
>>were .exe files installed on my disk that were no longer executable.   These were
>>things installed outside of cygwin.
>
>chmod a+x foo.exe

Yes, that would work, but why should I have to do that?   Am I supposed to
go to c: and do a find . -name "*.exe" | xargs chmod a+x ?   That is
not very user friendly....


>>>I'm amazed at the number of people who have incorrect /etc/passwd files.
>>
>>I would say that many people using cygwin, do not even know that they
>>have a /etc/passwd as it is created automatically by setup.   So, if the
>>setup program is not creating the correct thing, why would you be amazed if
>>there are many incorrect files around?
>
>I was working under the assumption that setup.exe created correct files
>since it uses mkpasswd and mkgroup to create files /etc/passwd and
>/etc/group.  So, telling people to run the same thing that setup.exe
>runs as a method to fix the problem "amazes" me.  I assume this has
>something to do with the -d switch to mkpasswd, which setup doesn't do.
>
>Apparently, I understand how this works and you don't.  So,
>I'm amazed and you're not.

I don't understand it that well myself, but as you pointed out, it is not
the same thing, but a different thing.   And, the default does not work.
The -d adds the current user and setup does not.   However, it logs you
in as the current user, which does not have an entry in the /etc/passwd file,
which causes all sorts of things to break.


>>>I haven't seen anyone say that running setup on a new computer doesn't work.
>>>It seems to be existing implementations that need tweaking.  I don't know
>>>why.
>>
>>That is not what we have seen.   After removing the install, and re-installing, 
>>I could not get it to work without the above two changes.   Anyway, an update
>>should work as well.  Perhaps I did not remove all of it, but I tried....
>
>Removing the install and reinstalling is not the same as installing on a new
>computer.

Anyway, there seems to be what I would consider a serious problem with the
current setup and at least updating, if not fresh installs.
I have already received a few emails from folks
thanking me for showing them how to get cygwin working again on their machines. 
I am just wondering if this is going to be something folks are going to have
to do with cygwin from this point on, or am I the only one that things this is
not the correct behavior?

-Bill


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/