This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com 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: Ready for test coreutils-5.2.0-1


So I will delete the following:
 usr/bin/uptime.exe
 usr/bin/kill.exe
 usr/share/man/man1/uptime.1.gz
 usr/share/man/man1/kill.1.gz

I will include the fileutils patches except the ones to src/copy.c and lib/regex.c since they have no apparent effect.

One final question: for now do I rename usr/bin/readlink.exe to usr/bin/corereadlink.exe (ditto for [...]/man1/readlink.1.gz) or do I leave them as is?

BTW I have updated the setup.hint file:

http://blackburn.homeip.net/cygwin-packages/release/coreutils/setup.hint

sdesc: "Basic file, shell and text manipulation utilities."
ldesc: "The GNU Core Utilities are the basic file, shell and text manipulation
utilities of the GNU operating system. These are the core utilities which are
expected to exist on every operating system. Previously these utilities were
offered as three individual sets of GNU utilities, fileutils, shellutils, and
textutils. Those three have been combined into a single set of utilities called
the coreutils. "
category: Base
requires: cygwin libiconv2 libint


Mark Blackburn

Christopher Faylor wrote:

On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 03:45:44AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:


Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:


There are also some patches I'm considering adding from fileutils-4.1-2 (proposed-fileutils-patches.txt). I got these by diffing fileutils-4.1 with the src package for fileutils-4.1-2. I was hoping that the previous maintainer could comment on these patches so I could figure out if they are relevant for the coreutils package.


If they the changes haven't been made in the coreutils source, why not continue using the Cygwin-specific patches?


agree. Any cygwin-specific patches that were in the "old packages" that haven't been pushed back all the way to "official" coreutils, need to be kept in cygwin's coreutils.



Agree.




There are still conflicting binaries:

kill.exe : cygwin-1.5.7-1


this is _probably_ cygwin specific. I'd either rename the coreutils one to 'corekill', or not distribute coreutil's kill at all.



Let's not distribute it.




readlink.exe : cygutils-1.2.4-1


I'll go ahead and remove this program from cygutils -- but only *after* coreutils has made it thru its initial shake-down period. Thus, I won't delay cygutils-1.2.5 waiting for coreutils to finish ITP'ing -- but I'll release cygutils-1.2.6 very soon after coreutils goes 'gold'.



Agree.




uptime.exe : procps-010801-2


my linux box shows /usr/bin/uptime as part of procps, not coreutils. Another candidate for a rename? ("coreps"?)



Do we need two of these? Let's not distribute it.


cgf




Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]