X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:46:31 -0800
From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <sthoenna AT efn DOT org>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Errors compiling cdrtools under cygwin 1.5.19
Message-ID: <20060125024631.GC4272@efn.org>
References: <012420061825 DOT 2204 DOT 43D671090006A0AD0000089C22092299270A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <20060124183552 DOT GA2889 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <43D69F82 DOT 8050209 AT verysmall DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <43D69F82.8050209@verysmall.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
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

On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 10:43:30PM +0100, pobox AT verysmall DOT org wrote:
> I used cygwin happily for very long time to compile 
> apache/php/postgresql and enjoy symlinks, and now I am cut-off from one 
> day to the next. The apache folks do not seem to care. The bug I 
> submitted is still without reply -
> 
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38364
> 
> Apache 2.x/php 5.x do not want to play on cygwin so far.
> 
> So I am three days in the dark and testing like hell vmware and minigw 
> to save my skin.

I don't understand why you haven't just reverted cygwin to the
previous version (yes, including packages that depend on 1.5.19 - a
brief perusal of the cygwin-announce archives from the release of
1.5.19 onward would show you which packages may fall into this
category).

The cygwin distribution provides access to previous versions
*because* it is known that things break from time to time, whether
due to a problem in or out of cygwin's control.

Additionally, if cygwin is that mission critical to you, you need to
have a testing phase between downloading new versions and putting them
into live production, just like for any other mission critical software.
 
> Seems this getline() breaks quite a lot and I am not quite sure this is 
> _very_ positive for cygwin. People just get left alone in the dark (no 
> everybody can debug and patch) and the pride of cygwin is somehow self 
> focused.

I don't understand the "self focused" part.  Re: alone in the dark, If
your concerns aren't addressed in the next few months, I think you can
make that claim.

> I would expect such dramatic moves to be done with more care. 

The only care that really could be taken to prevent things like this
is more users testing pre-release versions.  Development snapshots of
cygwin with getline() have been available for a long time now.  Note
that this isn't just addressed to you; if package maintainers heeded
the "release coming soon, please test a snapshot" messages cgf sends
out by testing that their packages build and run with the snapshot,
there'd be less scope for problems.

> Otherwise I could call cygwin nice, but not reliable.

--
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/