Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <00d801c09eb5$45537360$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: "Robert Collins" , , Cc: References: <200102222041 DOT f1MKfKj29110 AT quickmonkey DOT com> <20010224164002 DOT B6385 AT redhat DOT com> <200102242149 DOT f1OLns802613 AT quickmonkey DOT com> <00b601c09eb4$e3cc1ac0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> Subject: Re: cygwin with sockscap32 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:58:12 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Feb 2001 22:50:34.0118 (UTC) FILETIME=[3246DA60:01C09EB4] "Same ABI" should be "Backwarsd compatible ABI" Rob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Collins" To: ; Cc: Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 9:55 AM Subject: Re: cygwin with sockscap32 > Madhu, > > Chris Faylor is one of the three MOST QUALIFIED people to comment on > problems related to or involving cygwin. Check the project home pages > and see if you see why! > > I haven't been involved in the discussion, but I can easily believe that > it is _not_ cygwin's problem. And without the source code (which > apparently isn't available) there is no easy way for anyone in the > cygwin development team to analyse the problem. > > Having said that it comes down to choosing the more likely scenario, and > who you trust more. > > I have seen many occasions where software vendors have to release new > versions of their product when an O/S patch occurs because _they broke > the rules writing it_. Cygwin 1.1.x has the same ABI as cygwin b20. Most > ports for B20 run just fine under the current cygwin because cygwin has > been carefully kept backwarsds compatible. Occams razor suggests that > this is just another case of a corner cutting software vendor. The > sockscap made use of an unsupported API or ABI feature, and as such is > now broken. > > Of course, it might be a cygwin problem, in which case... > > YOU have the cygwin source. YOU are observing the problem in a closed > source product, YOU need to liase with the software vendor. > > Rob > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "MADHU" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 8:49 AM > Subject: Re: cygwin with sockscap32 > > > > > > You may choose to igmore the problem, as you have, and hope it goes > > away, but it hasnt. cygwin is unusable with sockscap, while it was > > before: because of changes to the code. I would apprecciate it if you > > could keep quietif you have nothing of value to add to the discussion, > > and random rants. > > Thanks > > Regards > > madhu > > > > > > |Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:40:02 -0500 > > |From: Chris Faylor > > |On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:41:20PM -0800, MADHU wrote: > > |>helu, > > |>that is just your opinion, I was seeking a little more technical > > |>explanation, and as I pointed out in my post, and my privatre > response > > |>to ernie boyd, ALL evidence points to a cygwin problem. > > | > > |It is more than an opinion. It is cold hard fact. Sorry. > > | > > |cgf > > | > > -- > > This is the mail archive of the cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com mailing list > > for the Cygwin project. > > Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] > > Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] > > Re: cygwin with sockscap32 > > To: "'Earnie Boyd'" > > Subject: Re: cygwin with sockscap32 > > From: Christopher Faylor > > Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:04:55 -0500 > > References: <878B7E94C206D511895800A0C9F4871CD5BB19 AT xcup01 DOT cup DOT hp DOT com> > > <3A954C6E DOT FF247549 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> > > Reply-To: cygwin at cygwin dot com > > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:29:18PM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote: > > >"MADHU,SURESH (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" wrote: > > >> >> I think its a cygnus issue. Because the sockscap code has not > > changed, but > > >> the cygwin code has - and the sockscap source code is not as open > > source as > > >> the cygnus code, > > > > > >Yes. It is and must be -- but perhaps the sockscap owners don't > > >understand that. By linking to the cygwin1.dll, the sockscap code is > > >required to be open source. If you cannot obtain the source from > > >them, > > >then it is because the owners are VIOLATING cygwin's license. > > > > > >They MUST release the code -- if they don't, I'm sure Red Hat's > > >lawyers > > >would love to talk with them. > > > > Yup. > > > > Also the fact that something "worked" before and "doesn't work" after > > upgrading > > cygwin does *not* automatically mean that "it's a cygwin problem". > > > > cgf > > > > -- > > Want to unsubscribe from this list? > > Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > > > References: > > RE: cygwin with sockscap32 > > From: MADHU,SURESH (HP-Cupertino,ex1) > > Re: cygwin with sockscap32 > > From: Charles S. Wilson > > Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] > > Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] > > > > > > > > -- > > Want to unsubscribe from this list? > > Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > > > > > > -- > Want to unsubscribe from this list? > Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple