Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RE: Now that the new setup is here...
Date:	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 08:44:15 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-ID:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA76008AB93@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
content-class:	urn:content-classes:message
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	"Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g2PLiKZ01002

Holdoff please Chuck,
	cgf's forwarded post here indicates that there is still at least
one serious bug in 2.194...

Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:03 AM
> To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Now that the new setup is here...
> 
> 
> there were two things I was going to do:
> 
> 1) move gettext from the contrib directory to the latest directory -- 
> and see if anybody barfs.
> 
> 2) update bzip2 to the latest release -- which involves the grand 
> library split thing (bzip2 -> bzip2 + libbz2_0).  However, the name 
> "libbz2_0" is incompatible with the old setup, and even 'cygcheck -c' 
> gets confused prior to the cygwin-1.3.8 release.
> 
> So, once I release libbz2_0, there's no going back to the old 
> setup -- 
> and everybody MUST update to the new setup or their installation will 
> become very confused.
> 
> Are we confident enough in the current setup.exe to do this?  I ask 
> because we've already yanked it down ONCE ....
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> 

- Raw text -