X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:39:55 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [patch 7/8] Backport shellword movement functions from bash 4.1
Message-ID:	<20101102233955.GB18359@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20101102204855 DOT 153395100 AT gmail DOT com> <20101102205036 DOT 943395100 AT gmail DOT com> <4CD07B02 DOT 8070301 AT redhat DOT com> <4CD07E53 DOT 5050602 AT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4CD07E53.5050602@gmail.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 02:10:43PM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>On 11/2/2010 1:56 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 11/02/2010 02:49 PM, dan.colascione wrote:
>>>  
>>> +  rl_add_defun ("shell-forward-word", bash_forward_shellword, -1);
>>> +  rl_add_defun ("shell-backward-word", bash_backward_shellword, -1);
>>> +  rl_add_defun ("shell-kill-word", bash_kill_shellword, -1);
>>> +  rl_add_defun ("shell-backward-kill-word", bash_backward_kill_shellword, -1);
>> 
>> Hmm, here, it probably makes more sense for me to bite the bullet and
>> port my cygwin-specific stuff from bash 3.2 into bash 4.1, rather than
>> trying to backport bash 4.1 stuff into my cygwin 3.2 build.
>> 
>
>Getting 4.1 would be better, sure, but it's not available right now,

You know you're communicating with the bash package maintainer, right?
If he thinks that it makes sense to upgrade to a new version rather than
rolling a new, patched older version, then you can't really use the "4.1
isn't available" argument since his point is that he could make it
available.  He's probably the only person who understands the tradeoffs.

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

- Raw text -