run.exe will not work with upgrade from 1.14.4 to 1.16.3

Larry Hall (Cygwin-X)
Mon Jan 5 04:04:00 GMT 2015

On 01/04/2015 06:41 AM, Laurens Blankers wrote:
> On 2015-01-04 00:02, Larry Hall (Cygwin-X) wrote:
>> The fact that the recent
>> changes interfere with previous usage is an issue that needs attention for
>> sure but reverting, while the maintainer's call, just trades misbehaviour
>> in the eyes of one group for that of the other.
> That may be true, but you are prioritizing new users over your existing user
> base here. There are many many users out there for which the behaviour as
> exhibited by 1.3.2-1 has worked for many years. Behaviour which is now
> broken, without even the slightest hint of what is going on! And without a
> way to get all the functionality back, even with changes!
>> I encourage those that want
>> to smooth the transition to help by trying the solutions so far and
>> offering feedback on what works well and what doesn't.  This is the way we
>> can reach a solution that addresses the concerns of both groups.
> I would like to help smoothing the transition, however not by forcing
> changes down peoples throats and then saying may be when can make this
> better some time in the future.
> If you want my help, do the right thing, acknowledge that the way of
> handling this was wrong. Revert the changes. And solicit the help of the
> people on this mailing list to come up with a well designed, well tested,
> and well documented solution.
>> I think your point has been heard.  There's no need to take it to another
>> Cygwin list or reiterate it here.
> I don't think so. You maintain that the approach chosen was the right one. I
> think the saying in English is "It Takes a Real Man to Admit when He's
> Wrong". I am sorry, I can't help you if you keep maintaining nothing went
> wrong.

So I'm guessing with your statement above that English isn't your primary
language.  If true, then perhaps that's why you keep saying I've made
statements I didn't make.  You say above that I "keep maintaining nothing
went wrong."  And yet you quoted me in your response saying "The fact that
the recent changes interfere with previous usage is an issue that needs
attention...."  If this is really just a language issue, then I
understand but let's try to avoid it in the future.  If not, I have
to again ask you not to attribute statements you make as ones I have made.
If you persist, I won't continue to respond to your thread, assuming there
would be any redeeming value to continuing this thread at this point.

OK, let me try to be as clear as possible:

1. I am not the maintainer of the xinit package.  That is Yaakov Selkowitz.
    You can see this by his announcement of the latest version.
    So when I say that how the upgrade of the xinit is handled is up to the
    maintainer, I mean it is up to Yaakov, not me.

2. Yaakov is a very capable and prolific contributor to the Cygwin project
    and has been for many years.  Because of his many hats and tasks, others
    (including me), from time to time, try to help people with issues they
    see, even if the package or packages in question are maintained by
    someone else (and this is the case with xinit as I mentioned above).

3. There have been a number of related issues that have popped up relative
    to the latest version of xinit.  I've listed quite a few entry points to
    the relevant threads.  You'll notice that sometimes Yaakov is answering
    the question raised and other times others are doing it.  That's
    standard operating procedure.


    When I mentioned above that you or others can help out by pointing out
    where the solutions proposed fall short, I wa referring to the solutions
    offered in the threads above, in case it wasn't clear to anyone.  I
    gather from your comments in
    <> that the
    only issue that you're aware of that isn't addressed by the solutions
    offered so far is the one about the icon showing in the task bar rather
    than the tray.  If you or others know of other issues, that would be
    useful to report.

4. I realize that you have a policy issue that you raised as a result of
    your xinit upgrade experience, which you posted about in
    <> and have
    subsequently taken to the Cygwin main list
    <>.  The policy
    question of managing package updates, I submit, is separate from
    getting current installations running after the xinit 1.3.4-1
    upgrade, since this update is already here and for all the reasons I've
    stated previously.  So I withdraw my previous request that you not post
    your policy question to the Cygwin main list (since I agree it is a
    general issue) but instead request that you only discuss the policy and
    not overlap with the specifics covered in the xinit package threads,
    since that will take it into X-land which takes it off-topic on the main



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:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin-xfree mailing list