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: Reverting from 1.7.0-45 [was Re: [1.7]: For the love of god, don't update!]


On Apr  6 09:03, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
> >   LOLWUT?  It turns out something has gone horribly wrong in the alternatives
> > department now:
> > [...]
> 
> Actually, from Corinna's reply, it appears that, in addition to
> reverting *alternatives* because of the dependence that the new -10
> package has on the the cygwin-1.7.0-45 ctype export, you may also need
> to revert any package that USES alternatives (or, at least, run
> /usr/sbin/alternatives to recreate the symlinks using the "old" method)

Actually, what I was trying to imply is that reverting to a pre-45 test
release is not a good idea at all.  Try to find the reason for your
problem while -45 is running.  Let's go forward, not backward, please.
I have successfully built and run vim 7.2.148-1 as well as
OpenSSL-1.0.0-beta1 under 1.7.0-45, and I have built and run several
test applications in the meantime.  We all know there are still bugs
in the code, right?  But reverting to an old release doesn't help us
at all.  If you really find a bug in -45 which is the culprit for
not being able to build gcc, you'll get a bugfixed -46 ASAP.  However,
what I'd need in this case is some sort of reproducible testcase...


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


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