This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: cannot run setup64.exe without admin privileges (even if renamed foo.exe)
- From: "Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <BBuchbinder at niaid dot nih dot gov>
- To: "cygwin at cygwin dot com" <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:52:42 +0000
- Subject: RE: cannot run setup64.exe without admin privileges (even if renamed foo.exe)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAPw2spinsbSZaduOMJtgR6rkaoJA9s7rTm6LCwvWBCK9-kiN8A at mail dot gmail dot com> <6CF2FC1279D0844C9357664DC5A08BA2148DD6 at MLBXV06 dot nih dot gov> <CAPw2spjNRbE1CVoLV1k9_YAaYaBjnRNStpB4s5kcX=OLkLRhGg at mail dot gmail dot com> <5231DE3D dot 1030706 at cs dot utoronto dot ca>
Ryan Johnson sent the following at Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:31 AM
>>> Try *copying* setup64.exe to foo.exe. Or download it again but save it
>>> with the name foo.exe.
>>> Windows may be remembering that the file used to be called setup*.exe.
>>> That memory might not get copied.
>> Doesn't work: "the requested operation requires elevation".
>On 12/09/2013 11:26 AM, Frédéric Bron wrote: I have vague memories that
>someone (Corinna?) suggested copying the file to a USB key and back: the
>FAT filesystem can't track the permissions that cause this behavior.
>Never tested it myself, though (maybe I should, it would be nice to lose
>the UAC prompt).
In a cmd.exe shell:
type setup64.exe > foo.exe
I did a cmp and the two files were identical (using 32 bit setup.exe).
I also tried in bash:
$ cat setup.exe > foo2.exe
Again the files were identical. However, ls showed permission for foo.exe
(made under cmd) as rwx while foo2.exe made under bash was rw-. Both open
fine from Windows Explorer.
Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple