2013/5/21 Corinna Vinschen: > I'm a bit reluctant as of the backward compatibility breakage. What > if somebody uses shutdown in a script? You know, starting a backup > in the evening and the last action of the script is to hibernate the > machine or something like that...
That's why I sent my email in March in the first place. But I really think having -h for halt is better for a POSIX/Linux-like shutdown. And "shutdown -h now" will now halt the machine instead of hibernate. Although I understand they definitely are not the same, it won't leave the machine turned on. It will be in a "form of off". A proper announcement is required. The backward compatibility breakage was the reason I thought about 2.x vs 1.x. > Say, do you want to take over shutdown > maintainership? It's an easy enough package to start with, it > builds fine on 32 and 64 bit, and you get the cygport configuration > "for free". What do you say? Anything "for free" must be good ;-) I see the cygport file is in src archive. It has been very long since I have played with cygport. And I have not looked at cygwin64, although I use Win7-64. I had no real need for cygwin64 so far, so I wanted to wait for it to be officially released. I just ran the setup64.exe found at a nearby mirror, installed cygport and gcc/g++ and shutdown compiles under 32 and 64 bit. So back to the question... why not take over? I will read http://cygwin.com/setup.html thoroughly, create the new packages and send the ITA any time soon. You keep the sources in CVS right now. But when I take over, I assume it is ok I put them at my github. Regards, Frank -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
