Message-ID: <446A20BF.5080005@t-online.de>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:58:07 +0200
From: Christian Franke <Christian.Franke@t-online.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060130 SeaMonkey/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: [Patch] patch -Z not working if timestamp contains seconds >=59.5
References: <054c01c668a4$554924e0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <444E95C0.9080708@t-online.de> <20060426080858.GA14738@sellafield.lysator.liu.se> <1FYg6G-0BFM1o0@fwd31.aul.t-online.de> <20060426100903.GR28583@calimero.vinschen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20060426100903.GR28583@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> ...
> Would you mind to discuss this on bug-patch AT gnu DOT org?  As far
> as my opinion counts, I'd think that aligning its behaviour with tar
> would be a good thing.  But the core developers might have an entirely
> different opinion...
>   

bug-patch is not listed at http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/.
Sending the report direct to bug-patch AT gnu DOT org, I've seen no 
observable
difference to /dev/null ;-)

Is there a more appropriate place to report patch bugs?

Christian


--
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/