Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 00:09:52 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: REALLY need help prior to 1.3.4 release
Message-ID: <20011005000952.A5265@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20011003000916 DOT A28775 AT redhat DOT com> <3BBAA8EC DOT 3000706 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011003110421 DOT E28936 AT redhat DOT com> <20011003112140 DOT J28936 AT redhat DOT com> <20011003225215 DOT A23380 AT redhat DOT com> <3BBC63AB DOT 1070203 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011004224133 DOT A19253 AT redhat DOT com> <3BBD2F1E DOT 3060204 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3BBD2F1E.3060204@ece.gatech.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 11:55:10PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 09:27:07AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>I updated to "current" CVS last night around 1am EDT, and rebuilt 
>>>cygwin.  After installing that, I saw the same behavior as before: raw 
>>>read worked, raw write did not (Permission denied).  :-(
>>>
>>
>>This was really strange.  Everything worked fine for me until I ejected
>>my floppy.  From that point on, I couldn't write to any floppy.  I had to
>>scroll back several times to convince myself that I wasn't
>>hallucinating.
>>
>>Anyway, since I could eventually duplicate the problem, I could actually
>>fix it.
>>
>>So, how about *now*, Chuck?  Does it work *now*?
>>
>>(If it doesn't just lie...)
>
>
>I'll give it a shot, in the morning.  Right now I'm trying to get 
>autoconf to pass its tests again.  Here's the deal:
>
>Per the earlier discussion about autoconf-2.13/2.52, I was attempting to 
>do a side-by-side installation of the two, and decided to run the 
>checks.  (eventaully to write a script that parses configure.in for the 
>AC_REQ[] line to determine which one to call, etc).
>
>2.13 had "226 expected passes, 33 unexpected failures".  (On both 
>cygwin-20011001, and cygwin-1.3.3-2).  This is the same as our previous 
>experiments, if you remember those.
>
>2.52 was failing all over the place with cygwin-20011001.  (With 1.3.2, 
>we had finally gotten autoconf to pass all tests).  I'm currently 
>running the tests again with 1.3.3-2, to make sure the 'breakage' 
>occurred during the 1.3.4 development cycle and not before.  So far I'm 
>passing all tests with 1.3.3-2 (but this'll take several more hours to 
>complete on my machine).

There have been a considerable number of changes since 2001/10/01.  I
didn't ask for volunteers to check this out until 10/3.  That is when I
ostensibly finished all of my infrastructure changes.

I wouldn't have expected that things would actually be broken on
2001/10/01 but it certainly makes sense to use a newer snapshot (or,
even better, CVS) if possible.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/