Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.2.20060816162448.09699ca0@pop.nycap.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:26:49 -0400
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: "William A. Hoffman" <billlist@nycap.rr.com>
Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
In-Reply-To: <20060816194705.GB7674@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
References: <6.2.3.4.2.20060815151104.0b40e260@pop.nycap.rr.com>  <01b901c6c116$21259430$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>  <6.2.3.4.2.20060816091525.0ab90af0@pop.nycap.rr.com>  <20060816144110.GX20467@calimero.vinschen.de>  <6.2.3.4.2.20060816111421.0b446b60@pop.nycap.rr.com>  <20060816155054.GY20467@calimero.vinschen.de>  <Pine.GSO.4.63.0608161418370.9095@access1.cims.nyu.edu>  <6.2.3.4.2.20060816144036.09695af0@pop.nycap.rr.com>  <20060816194705.GB7674@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

At 03:47 PM 8/16/2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>The suggestion was that a patch be submitted upstream.  I agree with the
>suggestion and have amplified on it a little in another message.
>
>This suggestion does not require further input from me.  If I was interested
>in being involved in coming up with a patch, I'd have already done so.
>
>I'm not interested in playing any further games of catch-up with you or
>anyone else.  Please don't try to involve me in your attempts to modify
>the upstream make.  However, should you actually come up with a patch, I
>will monitor the make mailing list and, if I have any objections, I'll
>make them there.

Without your support, I don't think the patch would get far.
I am thinking the patch would be something like:

#ifdef CYGWIN
#define HAVE_DOS_PATHS 
#endif


-Bill


--
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/