From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from omta002.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net (omta002.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net [3.97.99.33]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62E9C384F020 for ; Sun, 22 May 2022 16:38:14 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 62E9C384F020 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=SystematicSw.ab.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=systematicsw.ab.ca Received: from shw-obgw-4004a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.228.9.227]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id sYsZnRGetWi4QsoagngOHp; Sun, 22 May 2022 16:38:02 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.5] ([184.64.124.72]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id soarnosadsF60soarnaXOs; Sun, 22 May 2022 16:38:13 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=Z8n/oVdA c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=628a66f5 a=oHm12aVswOWz6TMtn9zYKg==:117 a=oHm12aVswOWz6TMtn9zYKg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=CCpqsmhAAAAA:8 a=94nOnFI1EgyDtX4ev68A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=ul9cdbp4aOFLsgKbc677:22 Message-ID: <6486f6da-f44e-455a-8697-7026e2bfde3a@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 10:38:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Updated: coreutils 8.32 Content-Language: en-CA From: Brian Inglis To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <628ba81b-a07b-9ee1-05cb-2dcdadc43d3d@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Organization: Systematic Software In-Reply-To: <628ba81b-a07b-9ee1-05cb-2dcdadc43d3d@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfCGIj6TzvPpEWPUkt/UPEFRuTRPdWCo/FWDdcUnupbe3EjaykgUzQxpz53YXdM7vTyNDvq/F4SSd0hGEDLJ5SJ6GlfWctImuu7RUhFgIaYhAxozAfpjL crs8Dx5b5Mwtkze5yiy5qJN6YTkL/0uUcxRW66RS0JsoT2tiW7BFDIyOqgP6lBEh3o5+oONRBlHRDzRC/Vmf65/Qo+B0rlm4JUQ= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1164.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) 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: Sun, 22 May 2022 16:38:15 -0000 On 2022-05-22 09:24, Brian Inglis wrote: > On 2022-05-21 23:54, Fergus Daly wrote: >> I've just updated coreutils. I don't use test versions. So I have >> $ uname --version >> uname (GNU coreutils) 8.32 >> Packaged by Cygwin (8.32-1) >> Now on 32-bit Cygwin I get >> $ uname -s >> CYGWIN_NT-10.0-19044-WOW64 [ previously CYGWIN_NT-10.0-WOW ] >> And on 64-bit Cygwin I get >> $ uname -s >> CYGWIN_NT-10.0-19044 [ previously CYGWIN_NT-10.0 ] >> Packaging error? > > That build is a value we have said for years we would make visible for > easier determination of Windows version used (21H2 for you and I), > previously only visible in /proc/version: > > $ head /proc/version > CYGWIN_NT-10.0-19044 version 3.3.5-341.x86_64 (corinna@calimero) (gcc > version 11.2.0 20210728 (Fedora Cygwin 11.2.0-2) (GCC) ) 2022-05-13 > 12:27 UTC > > What products or processes does it affect negatively, and are there > arguments for suppression, other than backward compatibility? This was enabled in an updated Cygwin uname(2) "syscall" in 2019 January, but not visible to older utilities built against the older API, only exposed when coreutils was rebuilt, as intended: * each string was lengthened from 20 to 65 bytes, and domainname added; * for kernel, added the Windows build number, and restored the 64 after WOW, removed for Windows 10; * for release, dropped the "s" snap indicator, and the API info in parentheses, added a dash and the API minor release, dot and architecture, and a ".snap" suffix for snapshots; * added UTC after version/date; for details see: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=commitdiff;h=84230b71c64765ad0e34faffdfe6d1c58477a84d -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised. [Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]