I don't understand your points. See my reply below with the leading char $
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: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7) . From: Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com> . To: cygwin at cygwin dot com . Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:29:32 +0200 . Subject: Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7) . Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none . References: <2ebc717eaaf041d7b516e93a6123b...@de01ex22.global.jhcn.net> <2b3a4976-09b2-cece-759d-0b2379ae3...@gmail.com> <edde67b3a1724bb484eb82cd48dce...@de01ex22.global.jhcn.net> ________________________________________ On 10/05/2017 11:12, Chevallier Yves wrote: Unfortunately I haven't tried 2.8 because we've already validated 2.7 internally and I would need at least 3 months to access to 2.8. That said I searched for a release note with information about cygpath, but I haven't find any. Bottom Post in this mailing list. Please. $ Is this a question? What do you please me for? Cygpath is part of the cygwin package. The source specific of "cygpath" is unchanged by ~ 6 months. The issue you see was likely a change inside the cygwin dll. $ Yes it is exactly what I was arguing because even if I change `cygpath.exe` for the oldest version, the issue is still the same About your internal validation, please note that the numbering scheme was changed with version 2.0 $ Which internal validation? Are you talking about `cygpath`? https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin-announce/2015-04/msg00046.html I suggest you to consider 2.x version as the successor of 1.7.x. $ I am considering 2.7 instead of 2.1 What are you talking about 1.7? Regards Marco $ By the way I still don't know how to answer/reply a message from this mailing list. I have to do polling over https://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-05/ and copy/paste everything into a new e-mail. I doubt this is the correct way to communicate. Do you have a clue? -- 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 ________________________________________ . References: o Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7) . From: Chevallier Yves o Re: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7) . From: Marco Atzeri o RE: cygpath compatiblity break (v2.1 -> v2.7) . From: Chevallier Yves Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] -- 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
