This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: New release time?
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 01:32:32AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 01:28:39AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >Should we unleash 1.3.23 on the world? This would be the first 64
> >bit capable version of cygwin, right? Are we fully ready for that?
>
> To answer my question, one thing I'd really like is 64 bit inodes.
> We don't have that now, right?
No. We could add them but that requires another newlib change due to
the definition of ino_t. Shall I?
AFAICS we're not fully ready for 1.3.23 even w/o 64bit inodes.
There's that strange core dump of the latest ctags version (5.5) which
only happens in the CVS version of Cygwin, not in 1.3.22, so we introduced
a bug somewhere. When the error happens, the stack is totally corrupted.
I'm trying to track that down.
Another problem is the 32/64 capability itself. While no package
maintainer is *forced* to rebuild his/her packages, that ideally happens
quick. Especially the packages handling users and groups are pretty
important and that's a *lot* of packages.
As soon as we release 1.3.23, we should go ahead and rebuild all packages
under control of at least people on this list within a week. On
cygwin-apps we should encourage all maintainers to rebuild as quick as
possible and we should set a date (+6 months or so) after which all
non-rebuilt packages are removed from the distro. This has the
interesting side effect that we can see which packages have lost their
maintainers ;-)
Bottom line: I think introducing 32/64 needs a bit of preparation.
And btw., shouldn't that be 1.5.0?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin at cygwin dot com
Red Hat, Inc.