Re: coreutils refresh request (again)

[Marco Atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com>]

On 10.06.2020 20:24, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via Cygwin wrote:
>> but it is missing the patch used to adapt it to Cygwin.
>> The patch modifies 27 files and unfortunately does not applies
>> clean to latest upstream source.
> 
> Fair enough (and again, there was no pushing);  but are you sure that all 27 patches are still actual?
> 
> Testsuite ran pretty well, though.  I looked as some failures (not all), and they looked rather benign.
> 
> ============================================================================
> Testsuite summary for GNU coreutils 8.32
> ============================================================================
> # TOTAL: 621
> # PASS:  413
> # SKIP:  167
> # XFAIL: 0
> # FAIL:  33
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 8
> 
>> The are at lest 3 points that need rewriting
> 
> Okay;  maybe those should be reported upstream, as Cygwin is largely standard-compliant these days?
> 

the testsuite is not relevant for these changes.

Coreutils are tweaked to manage "program" and "program.exe" as they
are the same thing and other similar things.
Some changes were propagated upstream and some not; I looked at the
first patch rejected, and upstream have reversed the logic of a test
that the patch was modifying to add one of these cases, so modifying the
source is not banal and need some consideration and test.

Both requires time that someone need to put for it.

Regards
Marco