X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:42:10 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Goldstar please (Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: xinit-1.2.0-2)
Message-ID: <20091230044209.GA3909@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <announce DOT 4B3A6D32 DOT 9050606 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>  <4B3A824F DOT 2080509 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>  <4B3A9187 DOT 8030806 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>  <4B3A9F4B DOT 4070508 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4B3A9F4B.4070508@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
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, Dec 29, 2009 at 07:31:07PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On 29/12/2009 16:27, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>> Sounds like a good idea, but I wish I'd known this was coming before
>>> wasting time on:
>>>
>>>          * Improve checkX behavior when used as 'barrier' in startxwin.
>> 
>> Sorry about that, Chuck, but this was just the latest of a long string
>> of issues involving these scripts.  We've been talking about replacing
>> them for a while, and the recent traffic on the list was enough of an
>> impetus to make me finally stop bandaging the scripts and find a better
>> solution.  Plus, we gain argument handling and .startxwinrc, something
>> the scripts would likely never do.
>
>Like I said, it sounds to me like a good idea; there's just so many
>issues that can go (and have gone) wrong in these scripts -- PLUS, whose
>idea was it to have TWO, one .sh and one .bat?!!?  Yeeesh.  We're well
>rid of them.

Yes, in fact, I think this deserves a gold star.  These things have been
a pain in the neck for years.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple