Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/03/01/10:17:20
Christopher Faylor wrote (quotes rearranged wildly):
>If you are running your own version of bash, then all bets are off.
Just double-checked. BASH_VERSION='2.05b.0(1)-release'.
I thought I was running 3.00 on Cygwin (I am on all other platforms),
but apparently I was just making an ass of myself on a public mailing
list (again?) stating that I was. Well, actually, it's first real
embarassing now that I have to admit it. Well, not "have to", but
anyway, there you have it. *hum*.
>>Ok. I was wrong. It wasn't in the October archives and didn't
>>immediately see anything obvious.
>It is obviously too early for me to be sending email.
*laugh* :-D.
The cygwin list. It's mean but it's funny =).
>>So, I looked in the archives for the release announcement for
>>the test version of bash-2.05b-17 and quickly found this:
>>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-09/threads.html#00781
Thank you very much!
>I thought that bash-2.05b-17 was the current version but it is
>actually a test version designed to handle the problem that you are
>apparently describing.
Fixed? Ooh!
I'm currently dancing around like an ogre with a brain disease over
the good news, but once I sober up I'll install it right away and let
the list know if it helps. Might take a week or so, hope it won't be
a month like the last time.
Once again, thank you very much for your help so far. Also goes to
the rest of you guys, of course.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -