I've been wondering during this whole event why one of the original proposal was not used?
As far as I can see, the main problem with both latest bash revisions is that the solution to the cr/lf problem demands that users be either pro-active or gifted guessers. Both the d2u and the shopt solutions requires the user to understand that bash trashing about with incomprehensible errors is due to bad line endings. This is compounded by the fact that those scripts may be lying in the middle of custom toolchains developed internally and used by non-programming end-users. Also, due to the previous more forgiving behavior and the nature of working in a Windows environment, the creeping of cr/lf is inevitable for some users. Add to this that both current solutions requires the modification of the scripts, Isn't it expected that it raised many red flags? Not counting those who are not inclined to read announcement and development mailing list and just install product and have it work out-of-the-box... I can see future new users figuratively throwing back cygwin in the trash-bin because it can't even run a simple shell script correctly. So why was the solution of using the 1st line of the script (which, it was claimed, is read anyway for other purposes) and base the seeking behavior on the detection of cr/lf there, rejected? -- 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/