Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <3CD391B3.CA852C57@freeler.nl> Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 09:45:55 +0200 From: Teun Burgers X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: new cygwin package: cgoban Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I see the original message has led to quite some discussion and even a decree. What is the status on the upload? My setup.exe seems to crash on an increasing number of mirrors right after download of setup.ini. This is the message: SETUP heeft een algemene beschermingsfout veroorzaakt in module USER.EXE op 0004:00005ff0. (dutch for general protecting fault). Charles Wilson wrote: > Similarly, I don't like the restriction that all 'X'-based packages go > under XFree86/ on sourceware. We don't put inetutils underneath > ncurses/. We don't put openssh under openssl/. And: > Further, if one accepts that there should be one tree for all X > **clients**, you've never stated WHY that single tree must be the same > one used by the XFree86 packages. They aren't PART of XFree86. They > just USE XFree86. I couldn't agree more. Putting them under XFree86 strongly suggests that the package would be part of XFree86, and that is not the case. Teun Burgers