David Dindorp wrote: > Uhm. No it's not.. > Bash 2.05b is so unstable under Cygwin that it classifies as a > volatile chemical. At least if you put it under a lot of pressure - > a normal users everyday use it may cope fine with, which is probably > how it's used by most people in here anyway. > > To be fair, this is probably more a Cygwin DLL problem than a bash > problem, or perhaps a "bash hasn't kept up with changes in Cygwin > because the maintainer haven't had the time" problem. It's running > quite stable under 1.5.10, it sucks with 1.5.12 and 1.5.13 and any > of the latest snapshots.. (Haven't tried 1.5.11, but I will as soon > as I get the time.)
I would say it's probably got to do more with changes in the cygwin DLL than bash. There's the PID reuse issue that has a workaround in the -17 package by Pierre's patch, and the // thing that Corinna mentioned. Other than that I'm not aware of any reported bugs that have been attributed to bash and not the DLL. I was basing my comment on what others that know more about it than I have said in the past: <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-09/msg01150.html> Brian -- 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/
