Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)

[Chevallier Yves <YChevallier@etel.ch>]

I don't understand your points. See my reply below with the leading char $ 

This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.
________________________________________
Index Nav:
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:
[Date Prev] [Date Next]
[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:
[Raw text]

Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)
. From: Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com>
. To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
. Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:29:32 +0200
. Subject: Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)
. Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
. References: <2ebc717eaaf041d7b516e93a6123b938@de01ex22.GLOBAL.JHCN.NET> <2b3a4976-09b2-cece-759d-0b2379ae3a4d@gmail.com> <edde67b3a1724bb484eb82cd48dcee67@de01ex22.GLOBAL.JHCN.NET>
________________________________________
On 10/05/2017 11:12, Chevallier Yves wrote:
Unfortunately I haven't tried 2.8 because we've already validated 2.7 internally and I would need at least 3 months to access to 2.8.

That said I searched for a release note with information about cygpath, but I haven't find any.


Bottom Post in this mailing list. Please.
$ Is this a question? What do you please me for?

Cygpath is part of the cygwin package.
The source specific of "cygpath" is unchanged by ~ 6 months. The issue you see was likely a change inside the cygwin dll.
$ Yes it is exactly what I was arguing because even if I change `cygpath.exe` for the oldest version, the issue is still the same


About your internal validation, please note that the numbering scheme was changed with version 2.0
$ Which internal validation? Are you talking about `cygpath`?

https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-announce/2015-04/msg00046.html

I suggest you to consider 2.x version as the successor of 1.7.x.
$ I am considering 2.7 instead of 2.1 What are you talking about 1.7?

Regards
Marco

$ By the way I still don't know how to answer/reply a message from this mailing list. I have to do polling over https://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-05/ and copy/paste everything into a new e-mail. I doubt this is the correct way to communicate. Do you have a clue?



--
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

________________________________________
. References:
o Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)
. From: Chevallier Yves
o Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)
. From: Marco Atzeri
o RE: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7)
. From: Chevallier Yves
Index Nav:
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:
[Date Prev] [Date Next]
[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]



--
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