Re: Update CoreUtils
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 02:29:30AM -0700, PolarStorm wrote: >Hello, >[snip] Ok, there is no new information here. I'm declaring this off-topic for the cygwin list and asking people to send any follow-ups to the cygwin-talk. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Christopher Faylor-8 wrote > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:26:01PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >>On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> I've taken the ball back. We don't need a new maintainer. >> >>You clearly do, as I have shown. You are just choosing not to take one >>on. That is your right of course. Let us continue the status quo. >> >>>I've spoken with Eric. I'm relieved that he still wants to stay on. >>> >>>If his, or any other maintainer's update speed is not meeting >>>expectations then please, as suggested, just build the packages for your >>>own use. > > You aren't privy to my private conversation with Eric. I'm clearly > satisfied that he will get around to updating his packages and I am > confident in his ability to follow through on this. Hello, I'm a rather random but very long time user of Cygwin, and only occasionally read the these threads. But after having read THIS thread, I'm left with is a rather disgusted feeling about certain peoples attitudes, behavior and manners towards other users who offer their help in sincerity. What is more surprising is how those who claim their moral standpoint the hardest are the ones who are the most rude and outright unprofessional in close to all aspects. The words and bickering found here, is the behavior you'd expect to hear from a group of teenage religions sect fanatics. I see absolutely no forward looking or proactive action going on here at all. If the current maintainer is not able to do his job for whatever or reproductive reasons, he should give it up. These packages are not his or your babies, they are bigger than that and your developer egos. Open your arms to new talent and fresh spirits. Let them prove that they can do what they claim and let go. I envy Mr.Penny for supporting this kind of verbal non-sense abuse and in this case, he's right on all accounts. If it would have been me, I'd simply left with a FU, long ago. Best Wishes, -- View this message in context: http://cygwin.1069669.n5.nabble.com/Update-CoreUtils-tp108520p108976.html Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Steven Penny wrote: On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: Do you? https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00284.html From the same thread. Amazing that you missed that. You are out of your element, mate https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00298.html I think you should re-read the thread. -- Chris J. Breisch -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:49:53PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:12:46PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >>On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: >>>On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: So the bottom line is that git's status is: missing a maintainer, hoping for someone to pick it up. >>> >>>You have short term memory? >> >> Do you? >> >> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00284.html >> >> From the same thread. Amazing that you missed that. > >You are out of your element, mate > >https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00298.html Nope. You are confused. Eric indicated 1) that he wanted to give up git and 2) he did not want to give up bash or coreutils. David Conrad was talking about git. So, as I said, we are missing a git maintainer even though we did have someone trying to take on that responsibility. You should be aware of what happened with git and should be able to discern a template for how to go about adopting it. Chest thumping and rambling essays aren't going to magically make you a maintainer. If you are interested then, as I mentioned in the link that you quoted, you have to learn the rules for becoming a maintainer. You don't need me to touch your shoulders with a sword to make things happen. Oh, and just in case I get quoted in the future again, I'll make it clear again: I'm talking about git, not coreutils or bash. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: > Do you? > > https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00284.html > > From the same thread. Amazing that you missed that. You are out of your element, mate https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00298.html -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Steven Penny wrote: On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: So the bottom line is that git's status is: missing a maintainer, hoping for someone to pick it up. You have short term memory? http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00255.html http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00279.html Do you? https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00284.html From the same thread. Amazing that you missed that. -- Chris J. Breisch -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > So the bottom line is that git's status is: missing a maintainer, hoping > for someone to pick it up. You have short term memory? http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00255.html http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2014-05/msg00279.html -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:56:41PM -0400, David Conrad wrote: >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:59:03AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >>> . . . >> >> Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing >> anything other than criticism. >> > >I started a thread, at one point, to ask about a newer version of git. >I offered to try to create a build, if it would help, even though >while I have over a decade of experience in the software industry I >have no experience as a Cygwin package maintainer. I also found that >Steven Penny had offered, six months or a year before my thread, to >build it. Adam Dinwoodie stepped up and offered to take over as >maintainer. He got a build out in short order, but there was a glitch >in either the cygwin dll or in openssl, I forget which, that caused >long-running git clones to fail. Once that was fixed, everything >seemed to be working except for something with git-cvs. I've never >used git-cvs, and haven't used CVS since early 2009, so I didn't know >how I could help with testing or resolving that issue. If I could >have, I would have. > >I continued to use Adam's git build of 1.8.5.2 for the next couple of >months, but it slowly started to bother me more and more that I was >using a beta build. I didn't want to go back to git 1.7.9 because that >version is well over two years old now (although, admittedly, I never >had trouble with it). So I installed the native Windows git (msysgit) >1.9.2 from git-scm.org. It took a bit of configuring to get it to play >nice with Cygwin. I need git because all my company's projects are in >git (nearly; a few stragglers are still using svn). I wish there was a >Cygwin build that was, say, a year old or less. > >(I still have one problem, that occasionally when it runs an external >tool, it uses its msys bash which doesn't understand SHELLOPTS=igncr, >which I need because of some stupid \r characters in the shell scripts >of npm from nodejs.) > >I love Cygwin. I've been a happy user for years. Cygwin bash makes >using Windows tolerable, which makes my life better. I deeply >appreciate everything you all do, and I know that you're volunteers. I >have no claim on your time, or your effort. If I have to build a few >things myself, or use another version, I can do that. But it does look >like some people have tried to help. I'm sorry I wasn't able to be of >more help. There's no need for a reply to this. If you read this far, >then thank you for your time, and thank you for all you do. The intent of this message isn't clear to me. You've just filled us all in on your experience trying to use git and noted that we need a git maintainer. I guess people who aren't aware of that are now aware. So the bottom line is that git's status is: missing a maintainer, hoping for someone to pick it up. Hopefully the subtext isn't that this is stalled because someone like Corinna or I didn't jump in to try to fix problems with git... cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:59:03AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >> . . . > > Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing > anything other than criticism. > I started a thread, at one point, to ask about a newer version of git. I offered to try to create a build, if it would help, even though while I have over a decade of experience in the software industry I have no experience as a Cygwin package maintainer. I also found that Steven Penny had offered, six months or a year before my thread, to build it. Adam Dinwoodie stepped up and offered to take over as maintainer. He got a build out in short order, but there was a glitch in either the cygwin dll or in openssl, I forget which, that caused long-running git clones to fail. Once that was fixed, everything seemed to be working except for something with git-cvs. I've never used git-cvs, and haven't used CVS since early 2009, so I didn't know how I could help with testing or resolving that issue. If I could have, I would have. I continued to use Adam's git build of 1.8.5.2 for the next couple of months, but it slowly started to bother me more and more that I was using a beta build. I didn't want to go back to git 1.7.9 because that version is well over two years old now (although, admittedly, I never had trouble with it). So I installed the native Windows git (msysgit) 1.9.2 from git-scm.org. It took a bit of configuring to get it to play nice with Cygwin. I need git because all my company's projects are in git (nearly; a few stragglers are still using svn). I wish there was a Cygwin build that was, say, a year old or less. (I still have one problem, that occasionally when it runs an external tool, it uses its msys bash which doesn't understand SHELLOPTS=igncr, which I need because of some stupid \r characters in the shell scripts of npm from nodejs.) I love Cygwin. I've been a happy user for years. Cygwin bash makes using Windows tolerable, which makes my life better. I deeply appreciate everything you all do, and I know that you're volunteers. I have no claim on your time, or your effort. If I have to build a few things myself, or use another version, I can do that. But it does look like some people have tried to help. I'm sorry I wasn't able to be of more help. There's no need for a reply to this. If you read this far, then thank you for your time, and thank you for all you do. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:26:01PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> I've taken the ball back. We don't need a new maintainer. > >You clearly do, as I have shown. You are just choosing not to take one >on. That is your right of course. Let us continue the status quo. > >>I've spoken with Eric. I'm relieved that he still wants to stay on. >> >>If his, or any other maintainer's update speed is not meeting >>expectations then please, as suggested, just build the packages for your >>own use. You aren't privy to my private conversation with Eric. I'm clearly satisfied that he will get around to updating his packages and I am confident in his ability to follow through on this. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > I've taken the ball back. We don't need a new maintainer. You clearly do, as I have shown. You are just choosing not to take one on. That is your right of course. Let us continue the status quo. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 03:29:40PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 01:00:24PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >>On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing >>>anything other than criticism. >> >>You want me to contribute? Give me maintenance over one of the >>aforementioned packages. Ball is in your court. > >You want to contribute? Stop wasting my time with attitude and learn >the rules. "Ball is in your court" but I'm not holding my breath for >you to do anything other than kvetch. I've taken the ball back. We don't need a new maintainer. I've spoken with Eric. I'm relieved that he still wants to stay on. If his, or any other maintainer's update speed is not meeting expectations then please, as suggested, just build the packages for your own use. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: > Of course, if you haven't yet successfully built the version of the package > you want to maintain, haven't applied the necessary Cygwin patches, and > haven't gotten it to successfully work on your machine, then it's a bit > ludicrous to expect someone to name you the maintainer of said package. You > haven't shown any evidence of your ability to perform in that capacity. # Bash Yes, I have built up to date Bash, this would be my pick if I am allowed maintainer as I feel it is an important package that should be up to date. # Git I have built up to date Git as well, but between Adam Dinwoodie build and CygwinPorts build Git is "good enough" for now # CoreUtils I think I tried and failed to built this a year ago, lately I wanted an up to date version of "dd" for the "skip_bytes" option, but I dont really need that now, so it is lower priority http://unix.stackexchange.com/a/121798 # apt-cyg I just to add for Christopher Faylor and others that I maintain "apt-cyg" a Cygwin package manager. http://github.com/transcode-open/apt-cyg Granted it is not an official package such as Bash, but it is something. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Eric Blake wrote: On 05/11/2014 10:42 AM, Steven Penny wrote: Can we get an update? I can create a build if needed. I haven't relinquished maintainership of this package yet. It's still on my list of things to build, when I get a moment (although free time has been a bit sparse as of late with the birth of my daughter last month). Please note that a new x86 coreutils package should not install 'hostname' and will require a synchronized upload of the x86 hostname package. The x86_64 distro already contains a hostname-less coreutils and hostname package. https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-apps/2013-04/msg00103.html https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-apps/2013-08/msg00107.html The download URL from above mail is no longer valid (dyn.com stopped the free accounts). New: wget -e robots=off -np -nH --cut-dirs=1 -R'index.html*' -r \ http://chrfranke.no-ip.org/cygwin/x86/release/hostname Christian -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 01:00:24PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing >>anything other than criticism. > >You want me to contribute? Give me maintenance over one of the >aforementioned packages. Ball is in your court. You want to contribute? Stop wasting my time with attitude and learn the rules. "Ball is in your court" but I'm not holding my breath for you to do anything other than kvetch. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On 05/13/2014 12:47 PM, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >> Of course, if you haven't yet successfully built the version of the >> package >> you want to maintain, haven't applied the necessary Cygwin patches, and >> haven't gotten it to successfully work on your machine, then it's a bit >> ludicrous to expect someone to name you the maintainer of said >> package. You >> haven't shown any evidence of your ability to perform in that capacity. > > ...and Eric has. Until he relinquishes his packages or disappears, the > majority (at least) of those on the list that use his packages appreciate > his efforts in the past and look forward to his support going forward. > > If Eric decides to give up one or more of the packages you're interested > in picking up as maintainer, then we'll all be appreciative of your efforts > too. :-) For that matter, I've _already_ offered git up for another maintainer, and am still waiting (at least 3 months later) for that transition to completely materialize. With progress like that, I'm less than enthusiastic about handing over coreutils or bash. But if you want to post a test package for bash and/or coreutils, I'll at least review your packaging to see if it looks like you preserved all the cygwin-specific patches I already created, before deciding that handing over maintainership makes sense. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com+1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Update CoreUtils
On 05/13/2014 02:36 PM, Chris J. Breisch wrote: Steven Penny wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing anything other than criticism. You want me to contribute? Give me maintenance over one of the aforementioned packages. Ball is in your court. If you're ready to maintain something, then you must have successfully built the version of the package you want to maintain, applied any necessary Cygwin patches, and gotten it to successfully work on your machine. Since you've done all that, I am touched by your concern that the rest of us are running out-of-date stuff, and am glad that you are so eager to contribute. I'm sure Eric et al. would be happy to accept the assistance. PTC. (http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC) Of course, if you haven't yet successfully built the version of the package you want to maintain, haven't applied the necessary Cygwin patches, and haven't gotten it to successfully work on your machine, then it's a bit ludicrous to expect someone to name you the maintainer of said package. You haven't shown any evidence of your ability to perform in that capacity. ...and Eric has. Until he relinquishes his packages or disappears, the majority (at least) of those on the list that use his packages appreciate his efforts in the past and look forward to his support going forward. If Eric decides to give up one or more of the packages you're interested in picking up as maintainer, then we'll all be appreciative of your efforts too. :-) -- Larry _ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Steven Penny wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing anything other than criticism. You want me to contribute? Give me maintenance over one of the aforementioned packages. Ball is in your court. If you're ready to maintain something, then you must have successfully built the version of the package you want to maintain, applied any necessary Cygwin patches, and gotten it to successfully work on your machine. Since you've done all that, I am touched by your concern that the rest of us are running out-of-date stuff, and am glad that you are so eager to contribute. I'm sure Eric et al. would be happy to accept the assistance. PTC. (http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC) Of course, if you haven't yet successfully built the version of the package you want to maintain, haven't applied the necessary Cygwin patches, and haven't gotten it to successfully work on your machine, then it's a bit ludicrous to expect someone to name you the maintainer of said package. You haven't shown any evidence of your ability to perform in that capacity. -- Chris J. Breisch -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing > anything other than criticism. You want me to contribute? Give me maintenance over one of the aforementioned packages. Ball is in your court. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:59:03AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>I'd rather have a maintainer that insulates me from \r-issues and says >>"no" before they hit me, than have a maintainer that don't understand >>why stripping every \r in sight isn't such a good idea. > >We already have a system in place for this. The Cygwin installer >allows you to choose "Curr" or "Exp". "Curr" being stable version and >"Exp" being experimental. Except the reality is that the choices are >"old" and "old". Funny how you're saying "We" as if you are actually contributing anything other than criticism. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 7:46 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > I'd rather have a maintainer > that insulates me from \r-issues and says "no" before they hit me, than have a > maintainer that don't understand why stripping every \r in sight isn't such a > good idea. We already have a system in place for this. The Cygwin installer allows you to choose "Curr" or "Exp". "Curr" being stable version and "Exp" being experimental. Except the reality is that the choices are "old" and "old". -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
Steven Penny wrote: These are major packages, not just "user X favorite package". Several people including myself have offered to update them, only to be met with "Sorry, I am maintainer not you. I will do it when I get time". It gets old after a while. Well, if you don't want to wait, and you're confident of your ability to update, then do so. You don't have to publish the package to use it on your own system. I don't know anything about the git source, but I know that bash and coreutils are a pain to update, because there's so much in both that depends upon Windows text mode/binary mode annoyances. Also, bash (I believe) understands Windows paths, and that doesn't make porting any easier either. I spent a very brief time looking at updating bash myself, and decided it wasn't worth the pain. I've done a little with coreutils in the past, and I suspect if I had to, I could update it using the patches from the last version as a starting point, but I haven't found a need to do so yet. -- Chris J. Breisch -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 07:29:10AM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >These are major packages, not just "user X favorite package". Several people >including myself have offered to update them, only to be met with "Sorry, I am >maintainer not you. I will do it when I get time". It gets old after a while. Frankly, so does your posting style. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On 2014-05-13 14:29, Steven Penny wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> Frankly, please give MSYS2 another try. We'd all appreciate it. > > Look at the facts: > > coreutils > newer version released 2 years ago > > bash > newer version released 3 years ago > > git > newer version released 2 years ago > > These are major packages, not just "user X favorite package". Several people > including myself have offered to update them, only to be met with "Sorry, I am > maintainer not you. I will do it when I get time". It gets old after a while. Now, I'm just a random user, but exactly because these are major packages, it's good to have a maintainer that actually understands and fixes problems related to Cygwin, instead of having a maintainer that just builds the latest version and uploads it. Given that you seem to love MSYS2 so much, I can report that I recently dealt with a \r-issue with MSYS2 bash. I'd rather have a maintainer that insulates me from \r-issues and says "no" before they hit me, than have a maintainer that don't understand why stripping every \r in sight isn't such a good idea. (to be fair, I'm not 100% sure it was an issue with the official MSYS2 bash or if it was some 3rd party patch on top of the official MSYS2 bash, I don't run MSYS2 personally). That said, I'd also love a bash update, but I'd rather have a working bash than a new bash. Because it is a major package. 2 cents Cheers, Peter -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > Frankly, please give MSYS2 another try. We'd all appreciate it. Look at the facts: coreutils newer version released 2 years ago bash newer version released 3 years ago git newer version released 2 years ago These are major packages, not just "user X favorite package". Several people including myself have offered to update them, only to be met with "Sorry, I am maintainer not you. I will do it when I get time". It gets old after a while. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 04:33:06PM -0500, Steven Penny wrote: >On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Eric Blake wrote: >> I haven't relinquished maintainership of this package yet. It's still >> on my list of things to build, when I get a moment (although free time >> has been a bit sparse as of late with the birth of my daughter last month). > >Frankly I dont see how you can hold maintainer and not even update once a year. >Between > >- coreutils >- bash >- git >- lack of a real package manager > >all being way out of date I have already switched to MSYS2 once. The only >reason >I came back is they still havent fixed the jacked mount points > >C:/msys64 on /usr >C:/msys64 on / > >while Cygwin correctly does > >C:/cygwin64/bin on /usr/bin >C:/cygwin64/lib on /usr/lib >C:/cygwin64 on / Frankly, please give MSYS2 another try. We'd all appreciate it. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > I haven't relinquished maintainership of this package yet. It's still > on my list of things to build, when I get a moment (although free time > has been a bit sparse as of late with the birth of my daughter last month). Frankly I dont see how you can hold maintainer and not even update once a year. Between - coreutils - bash - git - lack of a real package manager all being way out of date I have already switched to MSYS2 once. The only reason I came back is they still havent fixed the jacked mount points C:/msys64 on /usr C:/msys64 on / while Cygwin correctly does C:/cygwin64/bin on /usr/bin C:/cygwin64/lib on /usr/lib C:/cygwin64 on / -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Update CoreUtils
On 05/11/2014 01:10 PM, Thomas Wolff wrote: > > Am 11.05.2014 18:42, schrieb Steven Penny: >> current Cygwin version is 8.15 >> http://cygwin.com/packages/x86_64/coreutils >> >> 8.16 was released over 2 years ago >> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils >> >> MSYS2 is already using 8.22 >> http://github.com/Alexpux/MSYS2-packages/blob/master/coreutils/PKGBUILD >> >> Can we get an update? I can create a build if needed. > The current version of `expand` is not UTF-8 aware (and thus garbles > output). > If that's fixed upstream (which I don't know), I would strongly > appreciate an update, too. Upstream does not handle multibyte locales very well. It is a much bigger problem than just expand, and while some distros like Fedora have provided downstream hacks that attempt to provide UTF-8, I am not very willing to port them to cygwin if they aren't in a shape to push upstream first (particularly since cygwin's wchar_t is a different width than glibc, and therefore the downstream patches for Linux may fail to work on cygwin without a lot of tweaking). -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com+1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Update CoreUtils
On 05/11/2014 10:42 AM, Steven Penny wrote: > current Cygwin version is 8.15 > http://cygwin.com/packages/x86_64/coreutils > > 8.16 was released over 2 years ago > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils > > MSYS2 is already using 8.22 > http://github.com/Alexpux/MSYS2-packages/blob/master/coreutils/PKGBUILD > > Can we get an update? I can create a build if needed. I haven't relinquished maintainership of this package yet. It's still on my list of things to build, when I get a moment (although free time has been a bit sparse as of late with the birth of my daughter last month). -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com+1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
