X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:message-id
	:references:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=F2hd1
	cueIgrfmSrhvt/JKnc2cvhzQeoiYfThqIE6ZZxhYP7Jx9XtBizTIXgWbm74gi/IZ
	uAwyH0EJKgrH2IWXOS77lCoW/qTQOKNMPH7VjfIuRAVz/JyHQtiefaFMpu1p1vf3
	inIEZsfwgpJRYOIqOwUbUfDE0ncRLHDsfY58j4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:message-id
	:references:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=76p/XjiuWFZ
	TgF2vdBqhV9x33Vs=; b=DTdapPytQ9vMWf0cro/zuC0R4eO0CM1LwD0aDb2Guxd
	F6Az6eNmaduD5FuI0QtBPDmp3j3jCiopKXS5L5+n5norK6CCce1ZY8KNTcuzrRCJ
	mg4LmIkVlu+DwkaE8dfVLakWqEj+pXIJ3OU/DLLtU6zCsnGbIjTGwM+FLErmYDq0
	=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: ripple.fruitbat.org
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 19:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Peter A. Castro" <doctor AT fruitbat DOT org>
To: Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Trouble with running cygwin dll on Vortex86MX+ CPU
In-Reply-To: <20140408015026.GA2359@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1404071848370.9344@ming.fruitbat.org>
References: <20140404083359 DOT GD2508 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <loom DOT 20140404T113717-470 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <20140404113738 DOT GF2508 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <loom DOT 20140407T124141-753 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <20140407112313 DOT GA17922 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <5342D299 DOT 1040101 AT cygwin DOT com> <loom DOT 20140407T225832-327 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <534322E8 DOT 8070701 AT cygwin DOT com> <alpine DOT LNX DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1404071509070 DOT 9344 AT ming DOT fruitbat DOT org> <534350BD DOT 9040806 AT cygwin DOT com> <20140408015026 DOT GA2359 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-IsSubscribed: yes

On Mon, 7 Apr 2014, Christopher Faylor wrote:

Greetings, Chris,

> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 09:28:29PM -0400, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>> On 4/7/2014 6:41 PM, Peter A. Castro wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Geetings, Larry,
>>>
>>> Some comments about this (sorry if this is off-tipic):
>>
>> Since you're providing this Cygwin service, I don't consider information
>> about this service to be off-topic.  And, of course, if *I* don't consider
>> it off-topic, it certainly can't be. ;-)

Good to know! :-)

>>> 1) There used to be a directory to pull the snapshots, but that's been
>>>     removed or otherwise made inaccessable a while ago, so archving the
>>>     snapshots has been impossible for me.
>>
>> Understood.  Yeah, access to "snapshots", among others, is turned off to
>> robots.  I'd say check with Chris on this one to see if there could be
>> some accommodation here.
>
> The only thing that has changed in the last year is that the snapshots
> are now in an architecture specific directory.  I'm not aware of
> sourceware offering any method for accessing snapshots other than the
> snapshot web page.

Hmm... Perhaps I've been trying to wget the wrong directory.  I'll check 
on that and get back to you.

>>> 2) Packaging changes of setup.exe have made extracting the version string
>>>     impossible, save for actually running setup, which isn't something I'm
>>>     going to do on a daily basis.  If there is a method of extracting this
>>>     info from it, please do tell me how.
>>
>> I'm assuming it used to just be in the RC file in the past.  Didn't look
>> in the history to trace it back.  But now it is generated and put in
>> setup_version.c as a global constant setup_version.
>
> setup.exe is packed with upx.  If you want to see the version string I
> suppose you could unpack it with upx.

I have an old version of upx, so perhaps it's just out of date, but even 
when I could extract it, at some point the version string was moved to 
setup_version.c and became difficult to extract from the binary.  I'd 
largely given up, but I'll take another crack at it.

>>> 3) The format of setup.ini hasn't changed in any significant way that
>>>     prevents newer versions of setup from working with older versions of
>>>     the achive, and vise-versa, so it hasn't been worth doing regular
>>>     achives of setup.  Mostly I tell people to grab the lastest setup and
>>>     try it first.
>>
>> Yes, generally, this should work and I agree that this is the first,
>> easiest answer if there is no corresponding setup for a particular date.  I
>> was under the impression that you were also pulling setups with each
>> release.  That, of course, is no guarantee of direct correspondence
>> either but it's close.  No matter.
>
> It is entirely possible that a new field could show up in setup.ini
> eventually but I don't see the syntax changing so it's likely, but
> not guaranteed, that new setup.exe's will work with old setup.ini's.

Yes, there's no guarantee, I knowledge that.

That's why I randomly keep a copy of various versions of setup, just in 
case.  But, until something does change, it "WJFFM".  :-)

Once I have an ability to extract versions from setup again, I'll see 
about doing it more regularly.

>>>     The exceptions are for the Legacy release (hard coded for -legacy)
>>>     as well as the preview (-2) release, but that, again, was most about
>>>     the name of the setup file and the initial release path names.
>>>     So, there really hasn't been much incentive to archive setup.
>>>
>>>     That being said, I do have a Legacy and a -2 setup versions available
>>>     for those that need them, as well as some other older releases of
>>>     setup, just in case.
>>
>> Yes, I noticed.  That's a "Good Thing"(tm).  :-)
>>
>> Thanks,

Thanks, to both of you, for replying.  I really apprecite it.

>> --
>> Larry
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
> 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

-- 
--=> Peter A. Castro
Email: doctor at fruitbat dot org / Peter dot Castro at oracle dot com
 	"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood

--
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