Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Reply-To: Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050711230932.03d15ae0@pop.prospeed.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:19:01 -0400
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Larry Hall <lh-no-personal-replies-please AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: rebaseall (temporary?) patch
In-Reply-To: <20050712023329.GG17886@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
References: <20050708044418 DOT GA6431 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <20050711125847 DOT GC3856 AT tishler DOT net>  <20050712021350 DOT GC17886 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <42D32A83 DOT 60807 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>  <20050712023329 DOT GG17886 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 10:33 PM 7/11/2005, Chris Faylor wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 10:27:15PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>>>Thanks for the patch, but I'm leaning towards a simpler solution:
>>>>rebaseall will verify only ash is running and exit if other Cygwin
>>>>processes are running unless an override option (e.g., "-f") is
>>>>supplied.
>>>
>>>
>>>So, anyone who installs rebase will also need to install bash.  That
>>>seems unfortunate to me.  It means we can never deprecate ash.
>>
>>Perhaps it would make sense to have a special bash.exe installed in 
>>/usr/sbin/ that is statically linked, for all dependencies other than 
>>cygwin1.dll -- and THAT is the thing that /usr/bin/sh.exe is a 
>>copy/symlink/hardlink/whatever of?
>
>  break;
>  break;
>  break;
>  break;
>  break;


As a recap for those who haven't been reading this entire thread and 
related ones, creating a statically linked version of bash has come up
before and it didn't generate much enthusiasm (i.e. if the point is to 
make sh == bash so that there is more symmetry with Linux and less 
complaints as a result of sh != bash, creating a derivative of bash 
to act as sh is contrary to the original goal.)  I think Chris is trying 
to get out of this temporal causality loop, or in programming terms break 
out of this while(1) loop...


--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746                     


--
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/