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: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:40:23 -0800 (PST) From: "Peter A. Castro" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: zsh-4.2.0-1 (Attn: zsh maintainer) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20040326150928 DOT 0CD6C400140 AT redhat DOT com> <22ag60ps55ncebbc9dm2u1lele15os5mpp AT 4ax DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Peter A. Castro wrote: > On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, zzapper wrote: > > > On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:40:59 +0100, wrote: > > > >On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:09:28 -0500 (EST), wrote: > > > > > > > >>An updated version of zsh (zsh-4.2.0-1) has been released and should be > > > >>at a mirror near you real soon. > > > >> > > > >Hi I saw zsh 4.2.0 download this morning when I ran my daily setup > > > >however (having reset my PC as requested) > > > > > > > >zsh --version > > > >zsh 4.1.1 (i686-pc-cygwin) > > > > > > > >>whence zsh > > > >/usr/bin/zsh > > > > > > > I had to rename zsh-4.2.0.exe to zsh.exe myself (is that > > > normal/correct?) > > > > > > zzapper (vim, cygwin, wiki & zsh) > > > > Sounds like a packaging bug. The archive contains "/usr/bin/zsh.exe" as a > > symbolic link to "/usr/bin/zsh-4.2.0.exe". This will cause zsh to not > > work from batch files and shortcuts (!). (I'm tired) I just noticed, it's not a symlink, its a hardlink. As such, it'll materialize as if it was a real file in the filesystems and native Windows programs will see it as a normal file, not a link. > I don't think it will. I see /usr/bin/zsh.exe being turned into a real > file, during install, not a symlink, and /usr/bin/zsh has always been a > symlink, since day one, and I've not seen any problems reported to this > effect. I think zzapper's problem may be because setup didn't remove > everthing first or perhaps he installed zsh through some other mechanism? > > > What's weird is the fact that running "zsh" showed version 4.1.1. Even > > with the symlink this should not have happened. I assume running > > "zsh-4.2.0" would show version 4.2.0, right? It would be interesting to > > see if you have other copies of "zsh" in your PATH, which you can find out > > by running "/bin/which -a zsh". > > You can also type "echo $ZSH_VERSION" to get your current shell's version. > Oh, and btw, it does report "4.2.0" for me on all systems I've tested on. > > > Igor > > -- Peter A. Castro or "Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- 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/