Mail Archives: cygwin/2008/09/23/16:25:44
Larry:
> but adding work-arounds to Cygwin for other people's bugs just makes
Cygwin fragile and bloated.
Agreed, and understood, from a programmer's point of view.
> The first step in the process is very often to report the problem to the
provider of the software.
... and correctly diagnosing which software is responsible is often a
problem that exceeds most end users.
- As pointed out in the "CygX Run" thread, M$ is usually to blame.
- If the problem is RAM available to cygwin (no example to point to), that's
a user-configuration problem.
- In the case of the SFX zip file, my opinion is that the creator of the zip
should "really" learn to span.
There is no reason to transmit/copy-move a compressed file of more than
20M when "spanning" is available...
and DOSRAR will run effectively under cygwin (as I pointed out, copying it
to ~ or ~/bin, and
chmod 555 DOSRAR.EXE).
I'm so sorry that RAR won't "play nice" with cygwin, but it "plays nice"
with Windows, Linux, Unix, and
other operating systems. cygwin is a Windows tool, like dBase, Rbase, RAR
and so many others.
Cygwin (as a Windows shell) should be able to spawn a Windows task to run
outside of the domain of cygwin,
monitor the Windows task, allow the Windows task to run freely in Windows
according to Windows rules, and
receive a reported status back (by default) to cygwin from Windows.
After all, Bash can call/run/spawn csh and ksh and zsh scripts and receive a
status. Cygwin is a Windows
shell, so it should behave like a shell.
Just my two cents worth. :)
> For this issue, that would mean reporting it to MS...
Not to my way of thinking. ZIP SFX is the root of the problem. Not Zip, Not
Windows, Zip SFX without
Spanning. I would have to do some more research with the users before
deciding who the issue should
be reported to.
Hypothetical case-in-point, if the SFX was created on a Mac, then there
would be no way that a MAC
SFX would execute on a PC (but it should unzip). While I understand how SFX
files are convenient,
they immediately limit themselves by OS.
Again, I would suggest to the original poster (and I believe I did, in a
round-about way) that they
request their sender to resend the file using spanning. For the future, I
would suggest that the
original poster implement a new policy that they will not accept a single
file greater than 20M, and
that all filesets sent must contain at minimum an md5 file (to verify the
rec'v'd file's validity)
and at most include an associated 10% PAR set, and that received files will
be merged together if
the associated PAR files can verify/rebuild the large file. Otherwise, the
whole transmitted set
is to be considerred corrupt, just like they want to consider the SFX file
that they originally
brought to the list's attention. It will make file transfer more
secure/verifiable.
Again, that's my two cent worth.
Peace,
Barry Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of
Larry Hall (Cygwin)
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:13 PM
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [OT] polite response to a polite reponse...
On 09/23/2008, Barry Smith at SourceLink wrote:
> > ... but running a simple user program should not crash it. That
> > > doesn't mean that there it is impossible for a simple user program
> > > to crash it but if Windows crashes, it's a serious Windows bug not
> > > a program bug.
> That is just a fancy way of passing the buck.
> A former president coined the phrase "The buck stops here."
There are certain extremes where this has to apply but adding work-arounds
to Cygwin for other people's bugs just makes Cygwin fragile and bloated.
In general the policy for Cygwin is to fix the problem at the source in any
case possible. This holds true for any software whether it's free (as in
beer and/or speech) or not. The first step in the process is very often to
report the problem to the provider of the software. For this issue, that
would mean reporting it to MS, which the OP in the other thread said he
would do. It wouldn't hurt to follow-up on that, if you're game.
--
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?
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -