--- Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some confusion here: I was meaning that having something like:
> const char *revision="$Revision: $ ";
> in the file allows you to then use:
> const char *version = revision[11];
> to obtain the correct version number.
>
> Rob
I'm not sure I unders
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 07:31:04PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 12:11:26AM -, Chris January wrote:
>>> >>>The attached patch (against cygwin-1.3.9-1/winsup/cygwin) adds support
>>> >>>for a /proc virtual filesystem and a read-only version of
>>> >>>/proc/registry.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 10:59:10PM +0100, Christian LESTRADE wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to submit the following bugfix for theses bugs which appear
> mainly when using rxvt:
>
> * Unable to effectively disable c_cc[] input chars processing (like ^C)
> using
> $ stty intr '^-'
> When I
Hi,
after Chris has tagged Cygwin for the 1.3.10 release, I've now
applied the patches to allow 64 bit off_t.
Basically it adds the datatypes needed and new function calls
with trailing 64 as `lseek64', `stat64', etc. Additionally
I renamed lstat to cygwin_lstat to circumvent a problem with
lst
> Adding version numbers is not a bad idea (although, I can't honestly
> think of a time when it would have helped to have this information).
> Adding version numbers in the middle of the program, in the middle of a
> text string is, IMO, a bad idea. The version number should be at
> the top of t
> Adding version numbers is not a bad idea (although, I can't honestly
> think of a time when it would have helped to have this information).
> Adding version numbers in the middle of the program, in the middle of a
> text string is, IMO, a bad idea. The version number should be at
> the top of t
> Adding version numbers is not a bad idea (although, I can't honestly
> think of a time when it would have helped to have this information).
> Adding version numbers in the middle of the program, in the middle of a
> text string is, IMO, a bad idea. The version number should be at
> the top of t
> Adding version numbers is not a bad idea (although, I can't honestly
> think of a time when it would have helped to have this information).
> Adding version numbers in the middle of the program, in the middle of a
> text string is, IMO, a bad idea. The version number should be at
> the top of t
Btw., this introduces two new datatypes, defined by SUSv2
but not yet defined in newlib, blkcnt_t and blksize_t, both
used in struct stat. I added the definition of these types
to cygwin/include/cygwin/types.h not to trouble newlib for
now.
Corinna
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:15:06AM -0800, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
>>Adding version numbers is not a bad idea (although, I can't honestly
>>think of a time when it would have helped to have this information).
>>Adding version numbers in the middle of the program, in the middle of a
>>text str
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 01:23:51PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>Well, cygpath is wrong. cygcheck is wrong too, under this scenario,
>but not quite as wrong since it at leasts puts the version in its own
>string. I believe, it used to do something similar to cygpath but I
>changed it, intend
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 07:31:04PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 12:11:26AM -, Chris January wrote:
> >>> >>>The attached patch (against cygwin-1.3.9-1/winsup/cygwin) adds
support
> >>> >>>for a /proc virtual filesystem and a read-only version of
> >>> >>>/proc/
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:07:10PM -, Chris January wrote:
>> Please resubmit your patch against current CVS sources.
>Please find patch against today's CVS attached.
Ok. Preliminary comments.
1) The copyrights still need to be changed.
2) The code formatting still is not correct.
3) You
===
- Original Message -
From: "Joshua Daniel Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm not sure I understand. Hard-code the revision in a const char
man co might enlighten you.
Rob
> > I'm not sure I understand. Hard-code the revision in a const char
>
> man co might enlighten you.
>
I'm afraid I've never used CVS/RCS before. :(
Am I reading this right? If I just put $Revision$ in the code, once
it's checked in/out that'll be replaced with the correct version number?
I s
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 01:23:51PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>Well, cygpath is wrong. cygcheck is wrong too, under this scenario, but
strace
>not quite as wrong since it at leasts puts the version in its own
>string. I believe,
16 matches
Mail list logo
