Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 21:17:47 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: new package offering: zsh
Message-ID: <20020525011747.GA19501@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <1022183956 DOT 9775 DOT ezmlm AT cygwin DOT com> <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0205241651220 DOT 14210-100000 AT gremlin DOT fruitbat DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0205241651220.14210-100000@gremlin.fruitbat.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 06:02:35PM -0700, Peter A. Castro wrote:
>On 23 May 2002 cygwin-apps-digest-help AT cygwin DOT com wrote:
>There were some messages/questions that were only on the list (I get
>the digest version), so I appologize for not responding more promptly.
>I did want to respond to people and get a final resolution on zsh.

If you are going to be a maintainer, I'd request that you subscribe to
the non-digest version of cygwin-apps.  The traffic is really not that
great.

Hmm.  We should make this a requirement in the package maintainer's
guide.

>>From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
>>On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 06:32:07PM -0500, Matthew Smith wrote:
>>>I'll vote "yes" for this, but I do have a question: have you dealt with
>>>binary/text issues specific to the windows platform in your port?
>>
>>zsh has historically had pretty strong cygwin support so I don't think
>>this will be an issue.
>>
>>I would be thrilled to have this in the distribution.  I've been using
>>my own version of zsh for years and have been meaning to submit it
>>as a package.  I even went as far as incorporating it into mknetrel.
>>
>>I'd be happy to have some other victi, er, person to deal with the
>>inevitable questions, though.
>
>I'm willing to handle issues with zsh, and in particular, this port of
>zsh.  As I've said, I really enjoy hacking on it, and I feel it's a shell
>worth of inclusion in Cygwin.  Why else would I have offered it?

Huh?  You are apparently translating something that I said into some
kind of challenge.  Let me summarize my position:

"I love zsh.  I was going to offer zsh as a cygwin package but I'm happy
to have someone else do it".

I didn't infer that you weren't willing to support it and I didn't
assume that you'd just posted this with no intention of offering it
as a package.

(And, no, Chuck, I don't need a 10 paragraph explanation of where you
think the misinterpretation lies, here)

>>One minor question: isn't there a libncurses requirement for zsh?
>>And maybe a libintl-1?
>
>Funny you should mention that.  Actually, only the Zle modules cares
>about screen attributes and control, and it is it's own terminal manager
>(using termio for the line control).  It does link with termcap, but it's
>a static link, so no runtime needed, really.  Also, there doesn't appear
>to be a need for libintl (at least I didn't see it in any of the links). 

If it's using termcap then it needs a termcap dependency for
/etc/termcap.

>Now, as to the use of O_BINARY.  Is it the general concensus that this
>change should be investigated before the package will be accepted or
>would people like to give it a try while I experiment with it?

IMO, if you are going to be actively experimenting, you might as well
release this and see what happens.

cgf