Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:11:59 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: bash: tab completion failure from (but not at) /
Message-ID: <20050209091159.GJ2597@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <200502080725 DOT j187Pf0S024993 AT mx1 DOT redhat DOT com> <20050208084415 DOT GJ19096 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <cubn58$e0u$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cubn58$e0u$1@sea.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i

On Feb  8 19:58, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Feb  8 07:19, fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net wrote:
> >>Recent remarks ("I have an idea about how to fix the race but it would
> >>introduce a destabilizing change that I'd rather not chance before 1.5.13 
> >>is
> >>released") suggest that an updated cygwin1.dll might be imminent.
> >>Please could I mention a minor but annoying glitch described along with
> >>Corinna's immediate and effective fix at
> >>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-05/msg00449.html but which has
> >>re-emerged in recent snapshots, at least since
> >>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-12/msg00838.html, in which Corinna
> >>records her perplexity ("weird") at this re-emergence.
> >>Things worked properly in snapshot 20041222 but fail from 20041223.
> >Nevertheless, that's a bash problem.  Is our bash maintainer still around?
> Yep, still here..
> I'll have a look at what your patch in Bash is up to tomorrow (still 
> don't have a Windows machine at home) but it should be compiled in - 
> there's no reason why it wouldn't be: the only thing I haven't changed 
> is a fix for http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-09/msg01517.html.
> 
> I'll report back when I've checked (ping me if that doesn't happen in 24 
> hours - I'm rather busy lately...)

As I already wrote in http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2004-12/msg00838.html,
it seems that the patch is missing in the binary but not in the source.
A self-build version with the patch behaves correctly, the -17 version
does not.

If you have not much time anymore (and not even a Windows machine at home),
are you still willing to be bash maintainer for Cygwin?  I'm curious if
there's a chance to upgrade us to 3.0 at one point.  It seems rather stable
to me, though it needs the same fix to bash_directory_completion_hook
as the 2.05 version :-}


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

--
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/