This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: possible bug in 1.7.22-1 core DLLs
- From: starlight dot 2013z3 at binnacle dot cx
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com, Stephan Mueller <Stephan dot Mueller at microsoft dot com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:07:19 -0400
- Subject: RE: possible bug in 1.7.22-1 core DLLs
At 06:31 PM 7/31/2013 +0000, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>Yeah, I can see your viewpoint here. Christopher
>is known for being brusque at times. And you may
>have, no doubt accidentally, pushed a hot button
>for this particular community.
>For what it's worth, the Cygwin folks do prefer
>that people join the community when asking for
>help. Personally, I have no problem with hitting
>'Reply All' to make sure the author of a message
>gets a reply in addition to the group, but I think
>it's also a reasonable stance that to get support
>for a free product, people take the small step of
>joining the mailing list.
Some people like myself cannot abide subscribing
to firehose mailing lists and prefer to view
discussion threads with a browser. It does not
mean contributors, direct or indirect, are any
of value. Even if I were a direct contributor
monitoring it closely, I would /dev/null the
list and browse it.
>As for Christopher's brusequeness, I don't read
>what he wrote as nastiness; he's really just being
Rude at a minimum. The old saying applies:
You catch more flies with honey than with
>it's absolutely true that it's
>unlikely that anyone is going to look into this
>problem because it's not clear what the steps to
>reproduce the problem are, or even what the
>symptoms are, at this point.
It was fairly obvious from my message that
I was reservedly offering to help find the
problem, not in particular of a fix. Finding
the cause of such problems is generally
3x to 10x harder than fixing them, so the
loss here is the community's.
>A reasonable next step might be for you to provide
>the list with more specific info on the problem.
>The acronym STC (simple test case) is often found
>on the list -- as in "STC appreciated".
STCs are rarely "simple" to create. Usually
a ton of work.
>Ultimately, I'd encourage you to give the list
Not this summer. Have helped in the past
but don't have much time have been turned
>since the folks there (Christopher
>and Corinna are the two who do the bulk of the
>work on cygwin1.dll -- and as far as I know it's
>all volunteer) are generally very responsive to
>specific bug reports and turn around fixes
I am, aware of this and do appreciate their
efforts and CYGWIN, which is a great product.
>If you don't help isolate the issues
>that are causing _you_ grief, then you may be
>forever stuck on 1.7.16.
I dropped in 1.7.17 DLLs and it works fine.
Fixes the CTRL-C problem and the point
behind it all, running a critical build
script, work as well.
>From: cygwin-owner at cygwin dot com
>On Behalf Of starlight.2013z3 at binnacle dot cx
>Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 10:26 AM
>To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
>Subject: Re: possible bug in 1.7.22-1 core DLLs
>Well I uncovered a serious regression
>and expressed a willingness to track
>down the cause.
>However your nasty reply and bad attitude
>assures that I will defintiely not help
>At 01:21 PM 7/31/2013 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>You are right in assuming that newer DLLs should
>>work with older binaries but no one is willing to
>>do tech support or debugging based on vague
>>problem reports. So, it isn't clear exactly what
>>you're expecting. If you think someone is going
>>to take a "1.7.16" installation and then drop a
>>newer cygwin1.dll into it to debug your problem
>>then you are likely going to be disappointed -
>>especially if you can't even be bothered to
>>subscribe to the mailing list.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple