Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:02:05 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: 1.3.20 Message-ID: <20030206170205.GB20592@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3E418C80 DOT 9020309 AT eCosCentric DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 02:49:43AM -0700, Michael H. Cox wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> > To quote from the FAQ: >> > >> > "As of this writing, you need to install at least the cygwin source >> > package and the w32api source package. >> > >> > It is possible that the cygwin source package may require a newer >> > version of the w32api package since the release of the packages is not >> > always in lock step (another reason to just use CVS)." >> >> >... >> Otherwise why do you even bother giving people sources if you only intend >> them to use (the occasionally broken) CVS? > >Excuse me for butting in on this thread, but I'm having trouble using the >cygwin CVS respository and since CVS seems to be the preferred method... > >I'm trying to build a debug version of cygwin1.dll to help debug a problem >I'm having. I'd like to retrieve the source files used to build cygwin >1.3.19-1 from CVS. Following the instructions at http://cygwin.com/cvs.html >I tried to checkout this version using: > > cvs -d:pserver:anoncvs AT sources DOT redhat DOT com:/cvs/src checkout -r >cygwin-1-3-19-1 winsup You are replying to a thread with the subject "1.3.20". It makes no sense for you to be using 1.3.19 sources to track down your problem. Doesn't it make sense that there is a possibility that whatever problem you're experiencing might already be solved in CVS? If you did debug your problem and managed to come up with a patch, then, again, it *makes no sense* for you to provide a patch against older sources. There is, once again, a likelihood that your patch wouldn't apply against the newer sources. >(BTW, the tag cygwin-1-3-19-1 isn't in the list of available tags in cvsweb >at >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/?cvsroot=src, but it >is in CVS.) That's because the version tags are for my benefit. They are not intended for checking out a cygwin release. As Max has pointed out, to do that, I'd have to tag large parts of the sourceware repository. cgf -- Please use the resources at cygwin.com rather than sending personal email. Special for spam email harvesters: send email to aaaspam AT sourceware DOT org and be permanently blocked from mailing lists at sources.redhat.com -- 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/