Hi all,
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:03:43PM -0700, Joachim Achtzehnter wrote:
There was also some difference in newline handling which required another
set of sed changes, arghh!
Well with detailed bug reports like this and the previous "make provides an
error on one of my complex makefiles" we're surely well on the road towards
perfection.
This sarcastic response to one sentence out of a much longer post quoted in
isolation suggests that a clarification is in order. Neither of my previous
posts, not the one about the "threadlist_ix -1" error and not the one I
wrote specifically in response to a claim that the recent changes to make
were "not an inconvenience", were written with any expectations for a fix.
I do understand free software, I'm not paying anybody, hence I can have no
expectation of somebody doing work for me.
I wrote the first post (about "threadlist_ix -1") in case this particular
error message rings a bell given that the recent changes that must have
caused it are likely fresh in the minds of developers, i.e. trying to be
helpful. If it isn't anything obvious, clearly more detailed debugging
would be needed, something that won't be altogether easy given that it
occurs in makefiles that are complex and of which I know very little how
everything works (lots of scripting to generate make rules on the fly, so
it isn't even easy to see what the makefiles that ultimately get processed
by make contain without a lot of sleuthing).
My second post was specifically in response to the claim by mwoehlke
suggesting that the changes were "not an inconvenience". In this post all
the issues I mentioned were intended as illustrations of such
inconveniences, so there was even less implied expectation of somebody
acting on these. Note, that I wrote that I had already addressed the issues
caused by deliberate incompatibilities, all I intended to do was point out
that it *had been* inconvenient.
So sum up, you are the people doing the work, I'm not funding your work, so
all decisions are yours. You may or may not take into account that at least
some users are likely to be inconvenienced by some of these decisions, and
especially those using Cygwin as a tool for achieving cross-platform
portability of large complex systems, of which they sometimes know very
little (they will now have to understand more to get things working again).
Thanks for providing these tools, and thanks also to those who posted
possible solutions for some of these issues. As I wrote, in this case I had
already managed to address all issues related to the functional changes in
make, only the internal error remains (and at present it is still easy to
use the older make, which may change as we go forward).
Joachim
--
work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (http://www.netacquire.com)
private: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (http://www.kraut.ca)
--
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/
