Hi all,
we're now finally starting the release cycle for Cygwin 1.7. Not
everything is in it's place, some changes are still in flux and the
installation is still somewhat bumpy but we should get to all of that
while testing goes on.
We have set up a new release area which is dedicated to the 1.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>we're now finally starting the release cycle for Cygwin 1.7. Not
>everything is in it's place, some changes are still in flux and the
>installation is still somewhat bumpy but we should get to all of that
>while testing
On Apr 14 10:39, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >we're now finally starting the release cycle for Cygwin 1.7. Not
> >everything is in it's place, some changes are still in flux and the
> >installation is still somewhat
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 05:27:58PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 14 10:39, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >Hi all,
>> >
>> >we're now finally starting the release cycle for Cygwin 1.7. Not
>> >everything is in it's place,
On Apr 14 11:42, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 05:27:58PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Oh, hmm, I assumed you would do that anyway at one point.
>
> It will be a pain in the neck to do it if people start updating the
> current cygwin-2 directory while I'm trying to perfe
> The most important changes on the user level are the long path name
> support including UTF-8 character support, as well as IPv6. Other
> changes are also important, but these two will likely have the most
> impact. I'd like to ask you to keep an eye especially on them when
> building and testi
Andrew Schulman wrote:
> (1) Do all packages that include compiled code need to be rebuilt for Cygwin
> 1.7? IOW, is ABI compatibility broken from 1.5? Also, I presume that there
> would be no need to rebuild any packages that don't include compiled code,
> e.g.
> packages that depend only on P
On Apr 15 02:48, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> > They do? How and Why? Is that something which should be rather fixed
> > in newlib instead of in the autogen configuration?
>
> The BSD implementation of funopen() doesn't explicitly define any types
> for the cookie function
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> They do? How and Why? Is that something which should be rather fixed
> in newlib instead of in the autogen configuration?
The BSD implementation of funopen() doesn't explicitly define any types
for the cookie functions, but simply says they should match the
signatures
First of all, I couldn't have said anything better than Brian did.
On Apr 14 20:37, Brian Dessent wrote:
> For example I recently tracked
> down a configure issue in autogen where it assumed the BSD signatures of
> the types used with funopen(), which differ from the implementation in
> newlib.
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I see. So what we have in newlib is how it's defined on Linux.
> Howver, shouldn't autogen have the same problem on Linux then?
> If not, any idea why?
I suppose it's because on linux, HAVE_FOPENCOOKIE would be set and this
code would be skipped. It was only when HAVE_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Corinna Vinschen on 4/15/2008 3:50 AM:
|
| I see. So what we have in newlib is how it's defined on Linux.
fopencookie matches Linux. Linux does not have funopen. I guess the
reason funopen disagrees with BSD is that BSD took a differe
On Apr 15 06:06, Eric Blake wrote:
> Speaking of newlib stdio functions, shouldn't we go ahead and export
> fopen_memstream and fmemopen, as those will be required by POSIX 200x (and
> have a more standardized interface than either funopen or fopencookie)?
IIRC, you implemented it. Did I miss a p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Corinna Vinschen on 4/15/2008 6:15 AM:
| On Apr 15 06:06, Eric Blake wrote:
|> Speaking of newlib stdio functions, shouldn't we go ahead and export
|> fopen_memstream and fmemopen, as those will be required by POSIX 200x (and
|> have a mo
On Apr 15 06:26, Eric Blake wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> According to Corinna Vinschen on 4/15/2008 6:15 AM:
> | On Apr 15 06:06, Eric Blake wrote:
> |> Speaking of newlib stdio functions, shouldn't we go ahead and export
> |> fopen_memstream and fmemopen, as those w
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we're now finally starting the release cycle for Cygwin 1.7. Not
> everything is in it's place, some changes are still in flux and the
> installation is still somewhat bumpy but we should get to all of th
16 matches
Mail list logo
