From: Piotr Z. <p.z...@gm...> - 2012-04-24 01:08:15
|
I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. After installing it there is no gcc.exe in the C:\MinGW\bin directory and e.g. after updating the environment variable PATH with (C:\MinGW\bin) gcc is not working. -- Pozdrawiam / Regards Piotr Zdunek |
From: <Ji...@t-...> - 2012-04-24 07:19:21
|
Hi there, you can actually find different installation packages on the internet. I downloaded and installed a package (of the most recent release for Windows 7 and it works fine. It looks like that an installation package can save a lot of time time. Give a try. Best Regards, Wenzhong Von: Piotr Zdunek <p.z...@gm...> An: min...@li... Betreff: [Mingw-users] No gcc.exe in bin directory Datum: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 03:07:47 +0200 I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. After installing it there is no gcc.exe in the C:MinGWbin directory and e.g. after updating the environment variable PATH with (C:MinGWbin) gcc is not working. -- Pozdrawiam / Regards Piotr Zdunek |
From: <Ji...@t-...> - 2012-04-24 07:27:54
|
Hi there, you can actually find different installation packages for different OS platforms on the internet. I downloaded and installed a package (of the most recent release for Windows 7 and it works fine. It looks like that an installation package can save a lot of time time. Give a try. Best Regards, Wenzhong Von: Piotr Zdunek <p.z...@gm...> An: min...@li... Betreff: [Mingw-users] No gcc.exe in bin directory Datum: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 03:07:47 +0200 I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. After installing it there is no gcc.exe in the C:MinGWbin directory and e.g. after updating the environment variable PATH with (C:MinGWbin) gcc is not working. -- Pozdrawiam / Regards Piotr Zdunek |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2012-04-24 09:37:49
|
On 24/04/12 08:27, Ji...@t-... wrote: > you can actually find different installation packages for different > OS platforms on the internet. This may be true, but isn't particularly relevant to the OP's report of a possible problem with the latest release of our official installation tool. > I downloaded and installed a package (of the most recent release for > Windows 7 and it works fine. It looks like that an installation > package can save a lot of time time. In your opinion, perhaps. Unless that package collection allows for selective component installations, and is supported by a dependency aware installation tool, I strongly disagree. > Give a try. And pray that A.N. Other, whose unofficial and unsanctioned package collection you've chosen, has also put a good support infrastructure in place, because as soon as you run into a problem which doesn't manifest in our builds, then you are on your own. -- Regards, Keith. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2012-04-24 09:15:17
|
On 24/04/12 02:07, Piotr Zdunek wrote: > I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. mingw-get.exe? Or mingw-get-inst.exe? mingw-get.exe WJFFM. > After installing it there is no gcc.exe in the C:\MinGW\bin directory > and e.g. after updating the environment variable PATH with > (C:\MinGW\bin) gcc is not working. Well, it obviously won't, if gcc.exe wasn't installed. What does mingw-get --version say, if you execute it from the command prompt? If that's working as expected, what does mingw-get show gcc-bin say? If an installed version is reported, does mingw-get install --reinstall gcc circumvent the issue? If no installed version is reported, does mingw-get install gcc do so? FWIW, the following tickets would appear to be related: http://tinyurl.com/cfa7x68 http://tinyurl.com/cr7bbj3 -- Regards, Keith. |
From: Charles W. <cwi...@us...> - 2012-04-25 04:11:59
Attachments:
Setup Log 2012-04-24 #001.txt
mingw-get-log.txt
|
On 4/24/2012 5:15 AM, Keith Marshall wrote: > On 24/04/12 02:07, Piotr Zdunek wrote: >> I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. > > mingw-get.exe? Or mingw-get-inst.exe? mingw-get.exe WJFFM. Here are the two commands invoked by mingw-get-inst: C:\Windows\system32\cmd.exe /c mingw-get.exe update 2>&1 | "C:\MinGW-test\libexec\mingw-get\tee.exe" "C:\MinGW-test\var\log\mingw-get-log.orig.txt" and then C:\Windows\system32\cmd.exe /c mingw-get.exe install mingw-get pkginfo base gcc-core 2>&1 | "C:\MinGW-test\libexec\mingw-get\tee.exe" -a "C:\MinGW-test\var\log\mingw-get-log.orig.txt" I've attached two logs. The first ("Setup...") is created by mingw-get-inst itself (when you launch it with the /LOG option). The second is the result of those 'tee' commands above. It is apparent that, for some reason, mingw-get doesn't bother to download all of the necessary elements of 'base' and 'gcc-core' -- but then *pretends* to unpack them all the same. Unless I've messed up the command line, this seems to be a bug in mingw-get itself. For good measure, I repeated the experiment using mingw-get alone, without mingw-get-inst (and without the extra " 2>&1 | tee -a logfile" stuff -- that is: /c/Windows/system32/cmd.exe /c mingw-get.exe update /c/Windows/system32/cmd.exe /c mingw-get.exe install mingw-get pkginfo base gcc-core The behavior was unchanged: some obvious elements were not downloaded at all, but a pretense of unpacking and installing these missing tarballs was reported. -- Chuck |
From: Albrecht S. <vms...@go...> - 2012-04-24 09:59:58
|
On 24.04.2012 11:15, Keith Marshall wrote: > On 24/04/12 02:07, Piotr Zdunek wrote: >> I think there is an error in the newest version of MinGW installer. > > mingw-get.exe? Or mingw-get-inst.exe? mingw-get.exe WJFFM. I can confirm installation problems of gcc and some more, see below. I just tested it with mingw-get-inst-20120421.exe. >> After installing it there is no gcc.exe in the C:\MinGW\bin directory >> and e.g. after updating the environment variable PATH with >> (C:\MinGW\bin) gcc is not working. > > Well, it obviously won't, if gcc.exe wasn't installed. What does > > mingw-get --version $ mingw-get --version mingw-get version 0.5-beta-20120416-1 > say, if you execute it from the command prompt? If that's working as > expected, what does > > mingw-get show gcc-bin > > say? If an installed version is reported, does I can't tell, because I "mingw-get install"ed gcc already. After that it still didn't work, I also had to mingw-get install libgmp because Windows popped up an error message (missing libgmp-10.dll). After installing libgmp, gcc works. This really looks like a problem with dependencies or ... (see more info below). > mingw-get install --reinstall gcc > > circumvent the issue? If no installed version is reported, does > > mingw-get install gcc > > do so? > > FWIW, the following tickets would appear to be related: > > http://tinyurl.com/cfa7x68 > http://tinyurl.com/cr7bbj3 Yes, seems so. I'm sorry, I'm not yet registered for sourceforge bug tracking, so I can't comment there, but I can see clearly from the install log that gcc *should* have been installed. When I did the clean install, I selected: MinGW Compiler Suite C Compiler C++ Compiler MinGW Developer Toolkit (Includes MSYS Basic System) ... and I was show: Installing: mingw-get pkginfo C Compiler C++ Compiler MSYS Basic System MinGW Developer Toolkit Using pre-packaged repository catalogues (20120421) Destination location: C:\MinGW_test The (shortened) mingw-get-log.txt showed: install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma install: libstdc++-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-6.tar.lzma installing libstdc++-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-6.tar.lzma install: gcc-core-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma installing gcc-core-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma install: mingw32-base-2011060500-mingw32-bin.meta installing mingw32-base-2011060500-mingw32-bin.meta install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-doc.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-doc.tar.lzma install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lang.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lang.tar.lzma install: gcc-c++-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma installing gcc-c++-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma ... and obviously no download errors. When I (re)installed gcc (after mingw-get update) I got: $ mingw-get install gcc http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma?download 20.72 kB / 20.72 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libiconv-1.14-2-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma?download 535.88 kB / 535.88 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libmpfr-2.4.1-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma?download 108.53 kB / 108.53 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/pthreads-w32-2.9.0-mingw32-pre-20110507-2-dev.tar.lzma?download 21.05 kB / 21.05 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libquadmath-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma?download 159.00 kB / 159.00 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libgomp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma?download 18.61 kB / 18.61 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libmpc-0.8.1-1-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma?download 23.58 kB / 23.58 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libssp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma?download 15.03 kB / 15.03 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/libintl-0.18.1.1-2-mingw32-dll-8.tar.lzma?download 44.14 kB / 44.14 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dll.tar.gz?download 15.69 kB / 15.69 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/w32api-3.17-2-mingw32-dev.tar.lzma?download 1.07 MB / 1.07 MB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dev.tar.gz?download 862.97 kB / 862.97 kB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/binutils-2.22-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma?download 3.61 MB / 3.61 MB |================================================| 100% http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/gcc-core-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma?download 9.44 MB / 9.44 MB |================================================| 100% install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lic.tar.lzma install: libiconv-1.14-2-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma installing libiconv-1.14-2-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma install: libgmp-5.0.1-1-mingw32-dll-10.tar.lzma installing libgmp-5.0.1-1-mingw32-dll-10.tar.lzma install: libmpfr-2.4.1-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma installing libmpfr-2.4.1-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma install: libpthreadgc-2.9.0-mingw32-pre-20110507-2-dll-2.tar.lzma installing libpthreadgc-2.9.0-mingw32-pre-20110507-2-dll-2.tar.lzma install: pthreads-w32-2.9.0-mingw32-pre-20110507-2-dev.tar.lzma installing pthreads-w32-2.9.0-mingw32-pre-20110507-2-dev.tar.lzma install: libquadmath-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma installing libquadmath-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma install: libgomp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma installing libgomp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma install: libmpc-0.8.1-1-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma installing libmpc-0.8.1-1-mingw32-dll-2.tar.lzma install: libssp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma installing libssp-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-0.tar.lzma install: libgcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma installing libgcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-dll-1.tar.lzma install: libintl-0.18.1.1-2-mingw32-dll-8.tar.lzma installing libintl-0.18.1.1-2-mingw32-dll-8.tar.lzma install: mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dll.tar.gz installing mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dll.tar.gz install: w32api-3.17-2-mingw32-dev.tar.lzma installing w32api-3.17-2-mingw32-dev.tar.lzma install: mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dev.tar.gz installing mingwrt-3.20-mingw32-dev.tar.gz install: binutils-2.22-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma installing binutils-2.22-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma install: gcc-core-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma installing gcc-core-4.6.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-doc.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-doc.tar.lzma mingw-get.exe: *** ERROR *** package gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-doc.tar.lzma is already installed install: gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lang.tar.lzma installing gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lang.tar.lzma mingw-get.exe: *** ERROR *** package gcc-4.6.2-1-mingw32-lang.tar.lzma is already installed ... telling me that gcc had already been installed... I could also post the full log, but I hope this is enough, and it seems to be repeatable, since I tested it only because someone else reported the same problems. HTH -- Regards, Albrecht |
From: Hacker N. <sfh...@ho...> - 2012-04-24 10:07:16
|
> And pray that A.N. Other, whose unofficial and unsanctioned package > collection you've chosen, has also put a good support infrastructure in > place, because as soon as you run into a problem which doesn't manifest > in our builds, then you are on your own. Dear Wenzhong, Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you have downloaded, please? Cheers. Sergio. |
From: Piotr Z. <p.z...@gm...> - 2012-04-24 10:29:38
|
I have downloaded and installed this version from official website: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw/files/Installer/mingw-get-inst/mingw-get-inst-20120421/mingw-get-inst-20120421.exe/download 2012/4/24 Hacker NNX <sfh...@ho...> > > And pray that A.N. Other, whose unofficial and unsanctioned package > > collection you've chosen, has also put a good support infrastructure in > > place, because as soon as you run into a problem which doesn't manifest > > in our builds, then you are on your own. > > Dear Wenzhong, > > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you have > downloaded, please? > > Cheers. > > Sergio. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-users mailing list > Min...@li... > > This list observes the Etiquette found at > http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists. > We ask that you be polite and do the same. Disregard for the list > etiquette may cause your account to be moderated. > > _______________________________________________ > You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users > Also: mailto:min...@li...?subject=unsubscribe > -- Pozdrawiam / Regards Piotr Zdunek |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2012-04-24 11:06:32
|
On 24/04/12 11:07, Hacker NNX wrote: >> And pray that A.N. Other, whose unofficial and unsanctioned package >> collection you've chosen, has also put a good support infrastructure in >> place, because as soon as you run into a problem which doesn't manifest >> in our builds, then you are on your own. > > Dear Wenzhong, > > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you > have downloaded, please? If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. -- Regards, Keith. |
From: <Ji...@t-...> - 2012-04-24 14:07:20
|
Hi Keath, the question is just where and how to remove my name from the list ? Any direction will be highly appreciated. Thanks and best regards, Wenzhong Von: Keith Marshall <kei...@us...> An: min...@li... Betreff: Re: [Mingw-users] No gcc.exe in bin directory Datum: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:06:15 +0200 On 24/04/12 11:07, Hacker NNX wrote: >> And pray that A.N. Other, whose unofficial and unsanctioned package >> collection you've chosen, has also put a good support infrastructure in >> place, because as soon as you run into a problem which doesn't manifest >> in our builds, then you are on your own. > > Dear Wenzhong, > > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you > have downloaded, please? If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. -- Regards, Keith. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ [1] _______________________________________________ MinGW-users mailing list Min...@li... [2] This list observes the Etiquette found at http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists [3]. We ask that you be polite and do the same. Disregard for the list etiquette may cause your account to be moderated. _______________________________________________ You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users [4] Also: min...@li...?subject=unsubscribe [5] Links: ------ [1] ?ctl=dereferer&to=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5hY2NlbGFjb21tLmNvbS9qYXcvc2ZybmwwNDI0MjAxMi8xMTQvNTAxMjIyNjMv [2] javascript:void(0) [3] ?ctl=dereferer&to=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5taW5ndy5vcmcvTWFpbGluZ19MaXN0cw%3D%3D [4] ?ctl=dereferer&to=aHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5zb3VyY2Vmb3JnZS5uZXQvbGlzdHMvbGlzdGluZm8vbWluZ3ctdXNlcnM%3D [5] javascript:void(0) |
From: Sergio N. <sfh...@ho...> - 2012-04-24 15:48:03
|
> the question is just where and how to remove my name from the list ? Any direction will be highly appreciated. Hi Wenzhong, This isn't your fault. It isn't the first time this person has had bad intention(s) and discredited other packages and/or distributions. People put a lot of effort on developing, testing and making them available to the public. I'm more than happy to help you out. Let's take it offline, shall we? Sergio. |
From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2012-04-24 19:53:13
|
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Ji...@t-... <Ji...@t-...> wrote: > the question is just where and how to remove my name from the list ? Any > direction will be highly appreciated. --8<-- > You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users > Also: min...@li...?subject=unsubscribe The answer to that stares you in the face of every mail you receive from the list. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd |
From: Nathan R. <zer...@ho...> - 2012-04-24 17:31:57
|
> > Dear Wenzhong, > > > > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you > > have downloaded, please? > > If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of > propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. I confess, I am a bit shocked at this attitude. Some of the unofficial MinGW packages out there feature things that the official one does not - for example, a more recent GCC (e.g. some of them have already released GCC 4.7.0), or a GCC built with different configure options. What is the rationale behind actively suppressing information about these other alternatives, whose features may be legitimately needed by some MinGW users? Regards, Nate |
From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2012-04-24 19:51:12
|
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Nathan Ridge <zer...@ho...> wrote: > >> > Dear Wenzhong, >> > >> > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you >> > have downloaded, please? >> >> If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of >> propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. > > I confess, I am a bit shocked at this attitude. > Even so it is true. > Some of the unofficial MinGW packages out there feature things that the > official one does not - for example, a more recent GCC (e.g. some of > them have already released GCC 4.7.0), or a GCC built with different > configure options. > We do not have the time to resolve issues with distributions of software not distributed by the project. If you have a package that you would like to see distributed we have a means to do that. But people fail to ask and go off on their own. > What is the rationale behind actively suppressing information about > these other alternatives, whose features may be legitimately needed > by some MinGW users? This list is for MinGW distributed package use. If we open it to the world it would become unruly. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd |
From: Nathan R. <zer...@ho...> - 2012-04-24 23:18:40
|
> >> > Dear Wenzhong, > >> > > >> > Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you > >> > have downloaded, please? > >> > >> If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of > >> propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. > > > > I confess, I am a bit shocked at this attitude. > > Even so it is true. > > > Some of the unofficial MinGW packages out there feature things that the > > official one does not - for example, a more recent GCC (e.g. some of > > them have already released GCC 4.7.0), or a GCC built with different > > configure options. > > We do not have the time to resolve issues with distributions of > software not distributed by the project. If you have a package that > you would like to see distributed we have a means to do that. But > people fail to ask and go off on their own. > > > What is the rationale behind actively suppressing information about > > these other alternatives, whose features may be legitimately needed > > by some MinGW users? > > This list is for MinGW distributed package use. If we open it to the > world it would become unruly. I'm not suggesting that you answer questions about the use of unofficial MinGW distributions. I'm not even suggesting that you allow unsolicited advertisement of unofficial MinGW distributions. What I'm suggesting is that you allow people to post links to unofficial MinGW distributions in response to a user query, if using the unofficial distro solves the user's problem. Much as you wouldn't have a problem with someone posting a link to Cygwin if a user wanted to use fork(), or to Visual Studio if a user wanted to use C++/CLI. Regards, Nate |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2012-04-25 21:44:13
|
On 24/04/12 18:31, Nathan Ridge wrote: >>> Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you >>> have downloaded, please? >> >> If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of >> propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. > > I confess, I am a bit shocked at this attitude. > > Some of the unofficial MinGW packages out there feature things that the > official one does not - for example, a more recent GCC (e.g. some of > them have already released GCC 4.7.0), or a GCC built with different > configure options. And here, we are drifting way off topic, but anyway: - OP raised an issue concerning a possible bug, in a package we both provide and maintain. That's fine: it is a real bug, and we appreciate the responsible manner in which the OP alerted us; his behaviour here is laudable, and no cause for concern. - Responder (irresponsibly) said: "forget about that; just find and use some alternative product, which you may find on the web". That wasn't enough for him: he then repeat posted several minutes later, elevating his (in this context, unhelpful) post into the "propaganda" bracket. - Any Tom, Dick or Harry may create an alternative package set; that is anybody's right. (Hopefully, any who do will also take care to fulfil their GPL obligations, by maintaining and distributing a corresponding source package set; failure to do so constitutes a GPL infringement, and renders their entire package set illegitimate). - Although they do have the right to distribute their own package sets, Tom, Dick, and Harry do not have a right to demand that we give them a free (zero cost) platform to advertise and promote their packages. We will allow them a one-shot posting to advise of the availability of a specific package set, (with specific download URI, which irresponsible responder did not provide, in this case), but persistent promotion will be frowned upon. - If Tom, Dick, or Harry do wish to publish their own package sets, then they also must accept a responsibility to provide their own support infrastructure. We are under no obligation to assist them to shirk that responsibility, by allowing them to subvert *our* support infrastructure as a clearing house for their support requests; we simply will not tolerate this. > What is the rationale behind actively suppressing information about > these other alternatives, whose features may be legitimately needed > by some MinGW users? And there, you've said it. This list exists to serve the needs of MinGW users, (i.e. users of products distributed by MinGW.org). When information on alternatives is presented in a responsible fashion, with obvious intent to keep the MinGW client base informed, then of course it is welcome; when it is presented as a subversive and persistent attempt to denigrate MinGW products, and encourage users to forsake MinGW.org, then it becomes inappropriate. We reserve the right to moderate posts from subscribers, when we consider that they may be heading in this direction. -- Regards, Keith. |
From: Charles S. <cha...@n2...> - 2012-04-25 21:58:29
|
Just a thought... if you guys ran a forum instead of an archaic email-based listserv, you'd have a user community that could talk about these unofficial packages amongst themselves. Charles E. Smith Software Developer N2 Net Security, Inc. 919-423-0834 On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Keith Marshall < kei...@us...> wrote: > On 24/04/12 18:31, Nathan Ridge wrote: > >>> Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you > >>> have downloaded, please? > >> > >> If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of > >> propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status. > > > > I confess, I am a bit shocked at this attitude. > > > > Some of the unofficial MinGW packages out there feature things that the > > official one does not - for example, a more recent GCC (e.g. some of > > them have already released GCC 4.7.0), or a GCC built with different > > configure options. > > And here, we are drifting way off topic, but anyway: > > - OP raised an issue concerning a possible bug, in a package we both > provide and maintain. That's fine: it is a real bug, and we appreciate > the responsible manner in which the OP alerted us; his behaviour here is > laudable, and no cause for concern. > > - Responder (irresponsibly) said: "forget about that; just find and use > some alternative product, which you may find on the web". That wasn't > enough for him: he then repeat posted several minutes later, elevating > his (in this context, unhelpful) post into the "propaganda" bracket. > > - Any Tom, Dick or Harry may create an alternative package set; that is > anybody's right. (Hopefully, any who do will also take care to fulfil > their GPL obligations, by maintaining and distributing a corresponding > source package set; failure to do so constitutes a GPL infringement, and > renders their entire package set illegitimate). > > - Although they do have the right to distribute their own package sets, > Tom, Dick, and Harry do not have a right to demand that we give them a > free (zero cost) platform to advertise and promote their packages. We > will allow them a one-shot posting to advise of the availability of a > specific package set, (with specific download URI, which irresponsible > responder did not provide, in this case), but persistent promotion will > be frowned upon. > > - If Tom, Dick, or Harry do wish to publish their own package sets, then > they also must accept a responsibility to provide their own support > infrastructure. We are under no obligation to assist them to shirk that > responsibility, by allowing them to subvert *our* support infrastructure > as a clearing house for their support requests; we simply will not > tolerate this. > > > What is the rationale behind actively suppressing information about > > these other alternatives, whose features may be legitimately needed > > by some MinGW users? > > And there, you've said it. This list exists to serve the needs of MinGW > users, (i.e. users of products distributed by MinGW.org). When > information on alternatives is presented in a responsible fashion, with > obvious intent to keep the MinGW client base informed, then of course it > is welcome; when it is presented as a subversive and persistent attempt > to denigrate MinGW products, and encourage users to forsake MinGW.org, > then it becomes inappropriate. We reserve the right to moderate posts > from subscribers, when we consider that they may be heading in this > direction. > > -- > Regards, > Keith. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-users mailing list > Min...@li... > > This list observes the Etiquette found at > http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists. > We ask that you be polite and do the same. Disregard for the list > etiquette may cause your account to be moderated. > > _______________________________________________ > You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users > Also: mailto:min...@li...?subject=unsubscribe > |
From: Nathan R. <zer...@ho...> - 2012-04-25 23:45:56
|
> When > information on alternatives is presented in a responsible fashion, with > obvious intent to keep the MinGW client base informed, then of course it > is welcome; when it is presented as a subversive and persistent attempt > to denigrate MinGW products, and encourage users to forsake MinGW.org, > then it becomes inappropriate. We reserve the right to moderate posts > from subscribers, when we consider that they may be heading in this > direction. That is reasonable. Your earlier statement ("If you're going to do that, please keep it off-list. Dissemination of propaganda related to any such package may earn you "moderated" status.", in response to "Can you point us to the 'unofficial and unsanctioned' package you have downloaded, please?") suggested that you would object to (and consider "propaganda") a link to an unofficial distribution appearing in any context, which is what prompted my comment. Regards, Nate |