From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lucy.dinwoodie.org (b.8.0.0.8.9.b.0.2.f.0.9.2.a.d.b.d.a.0.2.5.1.e.d.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa [IPv6:2001:8b0:de15:20ad:bda2:90f2:b98:8b]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF1AE3858D35 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:30:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CF1AE3858D35 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dinwoodie.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dinwoodie.org Received: from adam by lucy.dinwoodie.org with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nREO1-000EgS-6H for cygwin@cygwin.com; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 14:30:57 +0000 Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:30:57 +0000 From: Adam Dinwoodie To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Would it be possible to update the bash package? Message-ID: <20220307143057.ha57cousne57kimo@lucy.dinwoodie.org> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <603C839E.2080509@tlinx.org> <60424EFA.2070500@tlinx.org> <944f06dc-1b9c-94c5-c56e-9259beb041a9@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <944f06dc-1b9c-94c5-c56e-9259beb041a9@sbcglobal.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP, RDNS_DYNAMIC, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 14:31:01 -0000 On Sun, Mar 06, 2022 at 10:59:57AM -0500, Zartaj Majeed wrote: > On 3/5/2021 2:23 PM, Christoph Reiter wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 5:50 PM L A Walsh wrote: > > > Really I don't see a compelling reason there should be > > > any hurry to update. In my own testing, I've been unable to > > > build a version that doesn't crash/dump core on linux and don't > > > really think the 5.x series has had a thorough vetting such > > > that it would be regarded as being as stable as 4.3/4.4. > > > > fyi, we've been using bash 5.1 in MSYS2 for 2-3 months now without any issues. > > > > regards > > Does bash 5.1 crash in cygwin? Please let us know so we can help - bash 4.4 is now over 5 years old As far as I'm aware, nobody has checked. We have the perennial OSS project problem: someone has to do it. Eric Blake is the maintainer for Cygwin's bash package (as well as the clearly-related bash-completion and bashdb packages), but I know hasn't had much time for Cygwin work for a while. If you want to help, I suspect the best starting point will be to download the source packages for the current Cygwin Bash, bump the version in the cygport file up to the latest and greatest upstream version, try compiling, and see what breaks and what needs fixing. Once you have it working, based on previous discussions (e.g. [0]) it should be possible to add you as a co-maintainer or sole maintainer for these packages. [0]: https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/2021-August/041444.html There's more guidance at https://cygwin.com/packages.html, and in particular in the "Adopting an orphaned package" at https://cygwin.com/packaging-contributors-guide.html (these packages aren't strictly orphaned, but the process is fundamentally the same). HTH Adam