Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 21:49:00 -0400
To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: Next net release will be 1.1.3
Message-ID: <20000522214900.A15450@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
References: <20000522172249 DOT A10159 AT cygnus DOT com> <200005222150 DOT RAA31092 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <s1s1z2ugiky DOT fsf AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <s1s1z2ugiky.fsf@jaist.ac.jp>; from fujieda@jaist.ac.jp on Tue, May 23, 2000 at 10:29:17AM +0900

On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 10:29:17AM +0900, Kazuhiro Fujieda wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 May 2000 17:50:13 -0400
>>>> DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> said:
>
>> I suspect people will get confused if the next release isn't 1.1.2.
>
>I agree with you. I think the next net release should be
>1.1.2. Users using a snapshot know what they are doing, so we
>don't need to worry about them.

The theory that people using snapshots know what they are doing was
disproved long ago.  I initially wanted the snapshots to be only
used by developers but that never really caught on.

In fact, I now routinely ask people to use snapshots to check if things
are fixed.  I'm not expecting any knowledge of these people other than
that they know how to use tar.

I also didn't notice anyone complaining when I said that the next
release would be 1.1.3.  If it was really that big a deal I would expect
that I'd get a complaint, given the frequent email that I get when I have
some typo or other in my email.

>>Is this just to avoid someone downloading a snapshot and being confused
>>about what version it is?  I'd rather somehow tag the snapshots as
>>being snapshots (i.e.  version is "1.1.1+20000522" rather than just
>>"1.1.1"), not wasting a version number on them.
>
>That's a good idea.  I, however, think "1.1.1+20000522" should be in
>place of "1.1.2".

The snapshot date has been part of the dll for some time:

strings cygwin1-20000521.dll | grep "%%% "
%%% Cygwin dll major: 1001
%%% Cygwin dll minor: 2
%%% Cygwin dll epoch: 19
%%% Cygwin dll bad signal mask: 19005
%%% Cygwin dll old termios: 00005
%%% Cygwin api major: 0
%%% Cygwin api minor: 20
%%% Cygwin shared data: 3
%%% Cygwin dll identifier: cygwin1
%%% Cygwin mount registry: 2
%%% Cygwin cygnus registry name: Cygnus Solutions
%%% Cygwin cygwin registry name: Cygwin
%%% Cygwin program options name: Program Options
%%% Cygwin cygwin mount registry name: mounts v2
%%% Cygwin build date: Mon May 22 00:16:31 EDT 2000
%%% Cygwin snapshot date: 2000-05-21-23:55-EST
%%% Cygwin shared id: cygwin1S3-2000-05-22 00:16:31

Additionally, the build date is part of the 'uname -a' output.

cgf