X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=NfcU
	8q5KPwCSTPHmKQjN1uy3P7cBdrwmaU0UZgEyt9bW8bh/gvFE1GvhakVpIdOJHCX8
	XiVTryAMsSPl94zSMoF4+J1Mkp1WAqzbXi83adGxNtuilqluGT+F0ezO6dVRSNRA
	GegJNFGWpqgndOaLpbqJiz5ctGELWQCXP7EyXHg=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; s=default; bh=EVb+DnU+kY
	tkjxgvonegvfet2mo=; b=rin9jKwJ4bixUfIejqzi1lG4NdzWUQIm4k09eviCOM
	/afkGM7W9i23kEWMyGd7hSRaD3hiVi+e3FRKnCLsJzoVYvLvF8TSbTCyF9GHyhnr
	uou0D6oAo/fqxxj6uoErvQSbvSR6FOtLADwf0JTh9NPFVmF28CSxcM/L4T1nN2aZ
	A=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	mx1.redhat.com
Subject:	Re: Repositories for Cygwin packages.
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<55F1EAA8 DOT 5020806 AT cox DOT net> <FZ3x1r00P2qVqVd01Z3ytt> <55F2102B DOT 70900 AT cox DOT net>
From:	Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>
Openpgp:	url=http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status:	N1110
Message-ID:	<55F212CF.3030604@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:31:27 -0600
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<55F2102B.70900@cox.net>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

--uw4b4a7eLQ7sjGiWAusEP2biiTKguRIP1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 09/10/2015 05:20 PM, David A Cobb wrote:

>>> I am looking at possible work within *COREUTILS*.  Obviously, there are
>>> significant deltas /versus/ GNU Upstream.
>>> Can you point me to the active repo for coreutils?
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/coreutils.html
>=20
> Yeah, Marco.  Thanks.
> Actually, the repo is <git://git.savannah.gnu.org/coreutils.git>.
>=20
> Are you saying that is your direct upstream and your sources only differ
> by the patchfiles installed by Cygwin-Setup??

Yes, the cygwin build of coreutils is made by taking the upstream
tarball release (which is created from the upstream coreutils.git at
labeled points in time) and then adding additional patches which are
distributed (as required by the GPL) in the source package that you can
download using setup.exe.

>>
> I  should have phrased the question differently, I guess.  My question
> is related to dependencies of the 'coreutils.' Cloning GNU Coreutils
> comes in with sub-module 'gnulib'.
>=20
> Suppose I wanted to propose a patch to Coreutils, but being stuck on a
> Windows platform I use Coreutils only through Cygwin64 and MSYS2.

Not a problem. My first patch to upstream coreutils was done exactly in
that manner.

> And, suppose for the moment, some of the changes are only relevant to
> the Windows platform.  I don't (yet) know how much GNU (i.e. RMS) really
> gives a flying bird about making Windows play nice.  So, to whom do I
> propose the changes?  I really, really don't want to create a private
> fork.  If I didn't think my ideas are worthy of pushing up the food
> chain, I should just go back to bed.

Depends on how invasive your changes are. If it is truly
windows-specific and hard to maintain, then upstream probably won't pay
attention (which is why I maintain some cygwin-specific patches, such as
.exe magic manipulations, downstream-only). But if it fixes a bad
upstream assumption (such as "function foo would never do that", except
that on cygwin function foo DOES do that, and it is feasible that some
other system would do likewise), then upstream is the right place. (For
example, my very first patch to upstream coreutils is dated 2005-01-11,
where I fixed Makefile.am to deal with $(EXEEXT) - and more than just
cygwin creates binaries with .exe suffix so it is relevant upstream).

If you're unsure whether a proposed patch is worth posting upstream or
downstream, pick one place, and I'm more than willing to help you
redirect it to the other place if it wasn't appropriate.  (Picking
upstream first is generally a nicer policy).

--=20
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


--uw4b4a7eLQ7sjGiWAusEP2biiTKguRIP1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV8hLPAAoJEKeha0olJ0NqUIQH/RiXHxXAiCR5Ip99FZ1xw/VW
7SHmJTGCsvJp42S6v2IKWyHRmAo7HUc7XS6Wo88rPSIY7fG+2Vh7QaaYCzeJo5oZ
6IecC/m76vHEtF8zdseAyi7ToAPw24FSOoteNZvM20lyBgV87uhgaOh+DFQB12Fx
17gaEaoMsUGrUNUMuCthIkd5o6eVhixrign5zr7xBxwcmxK09x2jqsXslOJe8c4W
pg3ONuK2I70ieWqO3KolHHtWn2l4TyMfvUeA9JIu1ribVQ9PXToDGxsynePiMsWR
dYRISnlHDVOQqeg/R4y3/th16LY7qKHaYvJpMYbPXy0Z+6vFMMRrtUx++YyiD/A=
=fYa0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--uw4b4a7eLQ7sjGiWAusEP2biiTKguRIP1--

- Raw text -