X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:07:15 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] [1.7] Updated: cygwin-1.7.0-59 Message-ID: <20090818220715.GA8713@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <4A8B2109.1090406@columbus.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A8B2109.1090406@columbus.rr.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:45:45PM -0400, Paul McFerrin wrote: >I'm not making a feature request but rather some future discussion ideas. > >We all seem to remember sub-version numbers like: > 1.7.0.-44 I don't think that anyone remembers that. >There is some benefits in using a consistant numbering scheme. When I >use the uname command, I don't care what date my dll was created. I >would like for uname to use the same format as we all talk about. Would >it be possible to get uname to report the full version with >sub-version? No more dates... Without this feature, Im' going thru >convuolutions to extract the full version and sub versions. The first official version of 1.7 will be 1.7.1. We'll continue with that normal numbering scheme once Cygwin is out of beta. 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