X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Andrew Schulman <schulman DOT andrew AT epamail DOT epa DOT gov>
Subject:  Re: Goldstar please (Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: xinit-1.2.0-2)
Date:  Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:30:43 -0500
Lines: 24
Message-ID:  <jeemj5drurn2ffvso9fut65q1gvmevovtq@4ax.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> <20091230044209 DOT GA3909 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
X-Archive: encrypt
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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.

Awarded.  http://cygwin.com/goldstars/#YS


--
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