$ cygcheck -f /bin/cat.exe
textutils-2.0.21-1
Can the attached patch be a candidate for inclusion?
It is all about cat.exe binary mode IO wrt stdin/out AFAIU.
Pierre A. H. wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:14:52AM +0200, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
>> You (Shankar Unni) wrote:
>>> Hannu E K Ne
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:14:52AM +0200, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
> You (Shankar Unni) wrote:
> > Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
> >
> >> I would appreciate if this DOS-text-ism could be removed.
> >> Would applying the above patch have hard to handle side effects?
> >> I guess some important scr
You (Shankar Unni) wrote:
> Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
>
>> I would appreciate if this DOS-text-ism could be removed.
>> Would applying the above patch have hard to handle side effects?
>> I guess some important scripts could be affected :-7 ...
>
> Umm, exactly what "fix" (change in behavior) d
Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
I would appreciate if this DOS-text-ism could be removed.
Would applying the above patch have hard to handle side effects?
I guess some important scripts could be affected :-7 ...
Umm, exactly what "fix" (change in behavior) did you have in mind?
--
Unsubscribe info:
>> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
>>
>>> Note that there is a difference depending on how you create the
>>> file; I'll hand over to cygwin-specialists to explain (or ponder
>>> on) why it has to be this way.
>>>
>>> I'm running BINARY mounts all over, still I get the behaviour
On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 07:07:21PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
>
> > Note that there is a difference depending on how you create the file; I'll
> > hand over to cygwin-specialists to explain (or ponder on) why it has to be
> > this way.
> >
>
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004, Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
> Note that there is a difference depending on how you create the file; I'll
> hand over to cygwin-specialists to explain (or ponder on) why it has to be
> this way.
>
> I'm running BINARY mounts all over, still I get the behaviour below.
> [snip]
Koduru, Seshasai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When $ is used in the PATTERN of grep command, it doesn't seem to
> work properly on my machine.
>
> I have run the following under cygwin.bat shell.
>
> $ cat tmp
> Line 1
> Line 2
>
> Line 3
> Line 4
> Line 5
>
> $ grep '1$' tmp
> (Gives no output. It should give
Original Message-
From: Koduru, Seshasai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 11:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: grep: $ in PATTERN doesn't seem to work properly
Hi,
When $ is used in the PATTERN of grep command, it doesn't seem to work
properly on my mach
Hi,
When $ is used in the PATTERN of grep command, it doesn't seem to work
properly on my machine.
I have run the following under cygwin.bat shell.
$ cat tmp
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4
Line 5
$ grep '1$' tmp
(Gives no output. It should give output as
Line 1)
$ grep -e '1$ tmp
(Gives no outpu
10 matches
Mail list logo