On Aug 9 10:20, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 04:06:24PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >--- run-1.1.10.orig/src/run.c 2006-05-22 14:32:43.000000000 +0200 > >+++ run-1.1.10/src/run.c 2009-08-09 16:03:58.000000000 +0200 > >@@ -349,6 +349,8 @@ int start_child(char* cmdline, int wait_ > > #ifdef DEBUG_FORCE_PIPES > > bHaveInvisConsole = FALSE; > > FreeConsole(); > >+#elif defined (__CYGWIN__) > >+ bHaveInvisConsole = TRUE; > > #else > > bHaveInvisConsole = setup_invisible_console(); > > #endif > >@@ -370,7 +372,11 @@ int start_child(char* cmdline, int wait_ > > NULL, /* process security attributes */ > > NULL, /* primary thread security attributes */ > > TRUE, /* handles are inherited, */ > >+#ifdef __CYGWIN__ > >+ CREATE_NO_WINDOW, > >+#else > > 0, /* creation flags */ > >+#endif > > NULL, /* use parent's environment */ > > NULL, /* use parent's current directory */ > > &start, /* STARTUPINFO pointer */ > > Since we don't have a package maintainer for run, why not just > make this change and release it for 1.7?
We don't know yet if we don't have a package maintainer. I'd like to wait if Alexander replies in the next few days. > Or, if Chuck's run2 is superior, why not just call it "run" for > 1.7 and avoid releasing this version at all? run2 is no drop-in replacement for run since it requires XML files for the configuration. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
