On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 07:55:52AM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote: >On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 10:08:33PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 08:43:07AM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote: >> >My inclination is to convert rebaseall to an ash script. >> >> Once again, let me point out -- that will not solve the problem. You >> won't be able to run the script from bash, for obvious reasons. > >Understood.
Yeah, I saw that you understood in a later thread. I should have kept reading. >On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 11:50:08PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> OTOH, writing a mingw C program to do what rebaseall does wouldn't be >> *that* hard. > >Agreed. > >I would like to go with this approach except rewrite rebaseall as a >Cygwin C program with the Cygwin DLL as its only dynamic dependency. >However, given my limited free time, it may be a while before I can >develop a C-based rebaseall. So, what is the best short-term solution? >Should I just release a new package with the following patch: > > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2005-07/msg00319.html > >applied? How about if for now you just make it an ash script (meaning that it relies on ash) and use your technique of checking for other cygwin processes running? If "we" are going to make this a program anyway, eventually, then I don't mind just using your technique which is really more foolproof than mine. No matter how this is implemented, checking that no cygwin processes are running before running rebaseall has to be a good idea. If we do make this a program, maybe it should just be an extension to rebase itself: "rebase --all" ? cgf -- 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/
