On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:23 +0100, "Ralf Wildenhues" wrote: > * Charles Wilson wrote on Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 07:57:02PM CET: > > > > This has been in the cygwin distro for five months (over a year, in one > > form or another), and heavily tested. > > Just to let you know, I am currently trying to sort out build > regressions on HP-UX systems, which are caused by bugs in its shell, and > exposed by some of the w32 changes to ltmain. Testing changes on the > system they are intended for is good, but is not enough to ensure > absense of regressions.
Well, that's certainly a truism. Two related lines of inquiry: 1) Under *normal* development rules -- e.g not a pre-release bug-fix-only phase, nor a not-quite-pre-release code slush like (I think) we're in right now, for 2.2.8 -- surely you aren't suggesting that EVERY contribution must be validated on EVERY platform, prior to push? These were tested on cyg/ming and linux, so in general, during /normal/ development, that should be sufficient contra reveiwer comments, right? 2) in the current pre-release-ish situation, if you want to postpone /all/ of the cygming patches until post-2.2.8 that's ok (I'd rather at least get /some/ of them in, but it's not the end of the world otherwise). Finally, it's not clear in your message: are you saying that *existing* win32 "changes" currently in master are causing problems on HP-UX, or just that some of the win32 changes /in this patch/ are causing them? -- Chuck