On 2012-05-29 16:02, Eric Blake wrote:
So now the question is whether the util-linux maintainer is willing to
turn on the building of su (can that version even be made to work in
cygwin?) or whether I should fork su and its cygwin-specific patches out
of the coreutils package and instead into its
On 05/29/2012 02:58 PM, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 29.05.2012 17:37, schrieb Eric Blake:
>> Upstream coreutils is considering completely dropping su, in favor of
>> having util-linux provide su across all GNU/Linux distros. Right now,
>> cygwin's su.exe comes from coreutils, but with a cygwin-specif
Am 29.05.2012 17:37, schrieb Eric Blake:
Upstream coreutils is considering completely dropping su, in favor of
having util-linux provide su across all GNU/Linux distros. Right now,
cygwin's su.exe comes from coreutils, but with a cygwin-specific patch,
and it still doesn't do quite what users ar
On May 29 09:37, Eric Blake wrote:
> Upstream coreutils is considering completely dropping su, in favor of
> having util-linux provide su across all GNU/Linux distros. Right now,
> cygwin's su.exe comes from coreutils, but with a cygwin-specific patch,
> and it still doesn't do quite what users ar
Upstream coreutils is considering completely dropping su, in favor of
having util-linux provide su across all GNU/Linux distros. Right now,
cygwin's su.exe comes from coreutils, but with a cygwin-specific patch,
and it still doesn't do quite what users are used to from a Linux
perspective. Is it
