-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes on 12/15/2005 1:43 AM: >>My plan for bash-3.0-12 and beyond is to only upgrade /bin/sh to the >>newest bash version if /bin/sh has an older timestamp than /bin/bash, >>and is not ksh or zsh. > > I see about a week after the above, you put out an experimental > bash-3.0-12. I don't see any other announcement of it; is the above > the only difference in it? Should it still be experimental?
Aargh. bash-3.0-12 depends on snapshots (it won't work with cygwin-1.5.18). I am waffling between putting out a bash-3.0-13 that works with cygwin-1.5.18, vs. waiting for cygwin-1.5.19. Meanwhile, I am also in the middle of trying to build libreadline6-5.1-1, so that I can then build bash-3.1-1. OK then, I guess you've convinced me. I will downgrade my cygwin to 1.5.18 long enough to build bash-3.0-13 (hopefully within the next week), announce it, before focusing on building bash-3.1-1 as the new experimental version that depends on a snapshot. - -- Life is short - so eat dessert first! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] volunteer cygwin bash maintainer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDoWuD84KuGfSFAYARAoQwAJ9ioQ0d09/2quKkjiYqsZxzXVlQLACeOWci ZE/1r64rnLBq+sTcuYsudzA= =uenh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/