Re: maintaining bash

["David Dindorp" <ddi at dubex dot dk>]

Brian Dessent wrote:
> David Dindorp wrote:
>> Uhm.  No it's not..
>> Bash 2.05b is so unstable under Cygwin that it classifies as a
>> volatile chemical.  At least if you put it under a lot of pressure -
>> a normal users everyday use it may cope fine with, which is probably
>> how it's used by most people in here anyway.
>> 
>> To be fair, this is probably more a Cygwin DLL problem than a bash
>> problem, or perhaps a "bash hasn't kept up with changes in Cygwin
>> because the maintainer haven't had the time" problem.  It's running
>> quite stable under 1.5.10, it sucks with 1.5.12 and 1.5.13 and any
>> of the latest snapshots..  (Haven't tried 1.5.11, but I will as soon
>> as I get the time.)
> 
> I would say it's probably got to do more with changes in the cygwin
DLL
> than bash.  There's the PID reuse issue that has a workaround in the
-17
> package by Pierre's patch, and the // thing that Corinna mentioned.

Just for reference, I'm also referring to -17.

--
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/