Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under Cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote: My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly problems had been reported by others, and that Cygwin-1.5.7-1 should fix matters. I upgraded to that, and the behavior is improved, but still buggy: (1) sometimes when I start zsh it hangs, sometimes it starts normally; (2) zsh command-line editing generally badly messes up the display when long command lines are being edited. I seem to recall that problem (2) was a consistent nuisance a while back, but then some new Cygwin release (I don't remember which) fixed it. (I generally run zsh under screen, by the way.) cgf said in earlier email that this has been fixed in CVS and will be pushed into the next release. For the moment, if you really need zsh (like me :), downgrade to 1.5.5 and wait for the update to appear. As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Right. This is *exactly* why there are problems with zsh. Someone had an easily reproducible problem that showed up in 1.5.6. Rather than report it they apparently waited for 1.5.7 to show up, assuming that all of their problems would be solved. There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have fixed today. We'll see. cgf -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under Cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
* Peter A. Castro (2004-02-12 08:03 +0100) On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote: My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly problems had been reported by others, and that Cygwin-1.5.7-1 should fix matters. I upgraded to that, and the behavior is improved, but still buggy: (1) sometimes when I start zsh it hangs, sometimes it starts normally; (2) zsh command-line editing generally badly messes up the display when long command lines are being edited. I seem to recall that problem (2) was a consistent nuisance a while back, but then some new Cygwin release (I don't remember which) fixed it. (I generally run zsh under screen, by the way.) cgf said in earlier email that this has been fixed in CVS and will be pushed into the next release. For the moment, if you really need zsh (like me :), downgrade to 1.5.5 and wait for the update to appear. No, use the new snapshot 1.58s. Thorsten -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under Cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote: At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote: My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly problems had been reported by others, and that Cygwin-1.5.7-1 should fix matters. I upgraded to that, and the behavior is improved, but still buggy: (1) sometimes when I start zsh it hangs, sometimes it starts normally; (2) zsh command-line editing generally badly messes up the display when long command lines are being edited. I seem to recall that problem (2) was a consistent nuisance a while back, but then some new Cygwin release (I don't remember which) fixed it. (I generally run zsh under screen, by the way.) cgf said in earlier email that this has been fixed in CVS and will be pushed into the next release. For the moment, if you really need zsh (like me :), downgrade to 1.5.5 and wait for the update to appear. As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206) fixes the problem. Still, I feel it's best for most regular users to wait for the official release instead of possibly compromising their current environment. -- Peter A. Castro [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cats are just autistic Dogs -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Right. This is *exactly* why there are problems with zsh. Someone had an easily reproducible problem that showed up in 1.5.6. Rather than report it they apparently waited for 1.5.7 to show up, assuming that all of their problems would be solved. Well, I would have reported it, but I never had a chance to upgrade to 1.5.6 in the first place (have been too busy with other things), and then along came 1.5.7 any all hell broke loose. For anyone who wants a stable environment, what's the harm in stepping back a version or two so that they can get back to work? I know that when things like this break in my *work* environment, the last thing I'd want is to play russian roulette with a snapshot which might make things worse. If you're not a developer, why not just wait? For the life of me, I could never quite understand why you and Larry keep pushing the latest stuff when it hasn't been fully tested or released. Now, that being said, I am a developer and I do play with the latest snapshots from time to time (like in this case), but that's in my home environment where I can tollerate things breaking (and often break them myself for fun :). There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have fixed today. We'll see. And, that little statement would make me even more nervious about getting back to something stable if I had a work schedule to keep. cgf -- Peter A. Castro [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cats are just autistic Dogs -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:06:15AM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote: Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206) fixes the problem. Did you report the fact that the problem was fixed? I don't see it in the archives. cgf -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under Cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
At 01:06 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote: At 02:03 AM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Morris Siegel wrote: My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly problems had been reported by others, and that Cygwin-1.5.7-1 should fix matters. I upgraded to that, and the behavior is improved, but still buggy: (1) sometimes when I start zsh it hangs, sometimes it starts normally; (2) zsh command-line editing generally badly messes up the display when long command lines are being edited. I seem to recall that problem (2) was a consistent nuisance a while back, but then some new Cygwin release (I don't remember which) fixed it. (I generally run zsh under screen, by the way.) cgf said in earlier email that this has been fixed in CVS and will be pushed into the next release. For the moment, if you really need zsh (like me :), downgrade to 1.5.5 and wait for the update to appear. As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206) fixes the problem. Great! Still, I feel it's best for most regular users to wait for the official release instead of possibly compromising their current environment. I guess I'd soften that statement by saying that one should always feel free to roll back to 1.5.5 from the current snapshot. Testing is good but doing so doesn't mean you have to be stuck on some bleeding edge with no recourse. There's nothing permanently destabilizing or compromising about running a snapshot if you keep around the version of cygwin1.dll that you were using before installing the snapshot. That's pretty easy to do, even if your favorite cygwin1.dll version isn't still available via setup.exe (which 1.5.5 is). So I don't view using snapshots as compromising an environment but rather insurance against a release that generates problems for everyone. I think anyone who can run a snapshot, at least from time to time, should. In this case, I certainly highly recommend that folks try the latest snapshot and report any problems they find that haven't already been reported. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 01:40:58PM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: At 01:06 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: Still, I feel it's best for most regular users to wait for the official release instead of possibly compromising their current environment. I guess I'd soften that statement by saying that one should always feel free to roll back to 1.5.5 from the current snapshot. Testing is good but doing so doesn't mean you have to be stuck on some bleeding edge with no recourse. There's nothing permanently destabilizing or compromising about running a snapshot if you keep around the version of cygwin1.dll that you were using before installing the snapshot. That's pretty easy to do, even if your favorite cygwin1.dll version isn't still available via setup.exe (which 1.5.5 is). So I don't view using snapshots as compromising an environment but rather insurance against a release that generates problems for everyone. I think anyone who can run a snapshot, at least from time to time, should. In this case, I certainly highly recommend that folks try the latest snapshot and report any problems they find that haven't already been reported. Right. We do not have a cadre of dedicated individuals who test cygwin. Obviously we can't even rely on the package maintainers for this function. We do rely on random people here to assure us that what we say is fixed is actually fixed. That's one reason why the snapshots are provided. It isn't as if using the snapshot is going to cause anyone an inordinate amount of pain. It's easy enough to back out an offending DLL and switch to a stable one. It's not as if cygwin is going to reformat your hard drive or something if you dare to try a snapshot. And, you might even consider that since I'm giving you something for free, you could provide a little bit of payback to me and the rest of the community by doing some testing. If I can't rely on that simple courtesy, then I'm not sure why I or anyone should bother trying to fix anything at all. That said, however, neither Larry nor I are in the position to do your thinking for you. If you decide that dropping back to an old version and rolling the dice that the next version will fix your problem is the best thing for you, then no one can stop you; just like no one can stop me from saying that I think that philosophy is short-sighted. cgf -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1.
At 01:21 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Right. This is *exactly* why there are problems with zsh. Someone had an easily reproducible problem that showed up in 1.5.6. Rather than report it they apparently waited for 1.5.7 to show up, assuming that all of their problems would be solved. Well, I would have reported it, but I never had a chance to upgrade to 1.5.6 in the first place (have been too busy with other things), and then along came 1.5.7 any all hell broke loose. For anyone who wants a stable environment, what's the harm in stepping back a version or two so that they can get back to work? I think I answered this in my prior response but I'll clarify. I'm not recommending that people jump head-first into using the latest snapshot and never look back no matter how much trouble they find. It's prudent and recommended to have a backup that you're comfortable with. If you find a problem with the snapshot that significantly impacts your productivity, report it, roll back, and do what you need to do. It's not an all or nothing affair. Of course, if you can help debug, that's great too! Sounds like you recognize all this but I'm just a little concerned that you're giving the impression to others that once you step into the realm of a snapshot, you can't roll back. I know that when things like this break in my *work* environment, the last thing I'd want is to play russian roulette with a snapshot which might make things worse. And if it does, so what? Report, roll back, move on. What's so hard about that? If you're not a developer, why not just wait? You certainly can but then you run the risk of your problem not getting fixed even if others think the problem has been fixed. Actually, I would characterize that stance as russian roulette but if that's what you want to do and it works for you, I can't stop you. For the life of me, I could never quite understand why you and Larry keep pushing the latest stuff when it hasn't been fully tested or released. And how do you expect it to get tested and ready for release without people's help? That's my point (and I think Chris would concur). Now, that being said, I am a developer and I do play with the latest snapshots from time to time (like in this case), but that's in my home environment where I can tollerate things breaking (and often break them myself for fun :). Everyone has to figure out where and how it makes sense to work with new software (and not just Cygwin). If running with newer stuff at home while keeping older stuff at work is what works for you, I won't argue. But it does seem like you're pushing too hard on this notion that one cannot recover from a snapshot that doesn't work for them. This is clearly false. There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have fixed today. We'll see. And, that little statement would make me even more nervious about getting back to something stable if I had a work schedule to keep. That's OK. There are still known problems, as the email archives can attest. If those aren't an issue for you, then running with the latest snapshot is a good idea. If not, then wait for the next one. Snapshots aren't just generated willy-nilly. They're only generated when someone, generally Chris, thinks it's worthwhile to have something to test by the community at large. It's an attempt to get releases that are very stable and generally useful. If no one uses them, then releases suffer. But no one can complain about the low quality release then. ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/
Snapshot cygwin1-20040206.dll (was Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 10:16:07 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have fixed today. We'll see. Just to let you know that the Emacs problems (inconsistent behavior and crashes) are still there with cygwin1-20040206.dll . The latest cygwin1.dll that work with the cygwin Emacs is 1.5.5 . Sorry for the poor bug report. Ehud. - -- Ehud Karni Tel: +972-3-7966-561 /\ Mivtach - Simon Fax: +972-3-7966-667 \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign Insurance agencies (USA) voice mail and X Against HTML Mail http://www.mvs.co.il FAX: 1-815-5509341 / \ GnuPG: 98EA398D http://www.keyserver.net/Better Safe Than Sorry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: use http://www.keyserver.net/ to get my key (and others) iD8DBQFAK9w+LFvTvpjqOY0RAgPCAKCIvmkHtoSoOsoBgi05KSfd0MwO5QCfcSgc vj3S4GNrMTdJEmTT0Vh+YxI= =PqTl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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/
Re: Snapshot cygwin1-20040206.dll (was Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1)
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:04:15PM +0200, Ehud Karni wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 10:16:07 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are still problems with the latest snapshot that I hope to have fixed today. We'll see. Just to let you know that the Emacs problems (inconsistent behavior and crashes) are still there with cygwin1-20040206.dll . The latest cygwin1.dll that work with the cygwin Emacs is 1.5.5 . So, I say the current snapshot has problems and you send email saying the current snapshot has problems. Doesn't sound like much information is flowing... cgf -- 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/
Re: Snapshot cygwin1-20040206.dll (was Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:33:41 -0500, Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, I say the current snapshot has problems and you send email saying the current snapshot has problems. Doesn't sound like much information is flowing... May be I should have added that when there will be a new snapshot, I'll check it, I promise. Ehud. - -- Ehud Karni Tel: +972-3-7966-561 /\ Mivtach - Simon Fax: +972-3-7966-667 \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign Insurance agencies (USA) voice mail and X Against HTML Mail http://www.mvs.co.il FAX: 1-815-5509341 / \ GnuPG: 98EA398D http://www.keyserver.net/Better Safe Than Sorry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: use http://www.keyserver.net/ to get my key (and others) iD8DBQFAK+W0LFvTvpjqOY0RAt85AJ92yNH+mzyG7fstX2K1D/McdSL9IgCfXQYK 5fk/hHSoYHT9AGkyFJFjm20= =DOf3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 10:06:15AM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote: Thanks, Larry, but I've already confirmed the latest snapshot (20040206) fixes the problem. Did you report the fact that the problem was fixed? I don't see it in the archives. Yes, I had, but I have found that, for reasons I can't determine, on some rare occassions, email I send to the cygwin list fail to actually reach the list. Since I often experience a delay in receiving cygwin mail (and other non-cygwin email, btw), I simply expected it to appear sometime later, and forgot about it. Yes, I have confirmed, via my mail logs, that cygwin's mail host was actually contacted and recieved the mail with an OK status, yet they never seem to be pushed through the list. This is a rare condition, and I know of only 2 cases of this have occurred (that I've tracked). I had though that, perhaps, in a fit of displeasure with my email contents of past, you'd setup a filter specifically to block certain emails from me, but I suppose that's just paranoid delusion on my part :) So, just to set the record straight, yes, I have tested snapshot (20040206) and found it to have fixed the zsh hang condition previously reported against zsh-4.1.1 with cygwin-1.5.6 and cygwin-1.5.7. And, I will be looking for this email to be echoed. :) cgf -- Peter A. Castro [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cats are just autistic Dogs -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1.
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote: I have to preface this by saying it's quite long and very OT. If you have something better to do, like fixing bugs, by all means skip reading the rest of this. At 01:21 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Right. This is *exactly* why there are problems with zsh. Someone had an easily reproducible problem that showed up in 1.5.6. Rather than report it they apparently waited for 1.5.7 to show up, assuming that all of their problems would be solved. Well, I would have reported it, but I never had a chance to upgrade to 1.5.6 in the first place (have been too busy with other things), and then along came 1.5.7 any all hell broke loose. For anyone who wants a stable environment, what's the harm in stepping back a version or two so that they can get back to work? I think I answered this in my prior response but I'll clarify. I'm not recommending that people jump head-first into using the latest snapshot and never look back no matter how much trouble they find. It's prudent and recommended to have a backup that you're comfortable with. If you find a problem with the snapshot that significantly impacts your productivity, report it, roll back, and do what you need to do. It's not an all or nothing affair. Of course, if you can help debug, that's great too! Sounds like you recognize all this but I'm just a little concerned Recognize? Hell, I *do* debug! But, debugging isn't for everyone and everyone shouldn't be encouraged to attempt debugging unless they have the skills to do so. that you're giving the impression to others that once you step into the realm of a snapshot, you can't roll back. I'm not trying to debate you on this issue. I feel snapshots are a good thing to try, *if you can afford to do it*. I never stated that you couldn't rollback from a snapshot, given one saves the original version first (and even that's not a requirement), but doing all that is extra effort in the eyes of a non-dev user. By contrast, there have been many snapshots which break in various ways in which case rolling back is the only feasible recourse. I was thinking more along the lines of someone who's been given the cygwin environment to work in, by someone else, and who tried an updated (why? because the could or someone else told them to do so!), but found problems and really doesn't know what to do next. For that person, simply rolling back to a stable version is more expedient and less hassle than hunting for a snapshot and trying it out. Not everyone wants to be a guinea pig, nor should everyone have to be one. This is how my work environment is, btw. We have several developers who are simply cygwin users and don't know the details of how/why cygwin is, but simply need it to get their jobs done. I am a resource for them, but I'm pretty busy myself, and rather than guide them through trying a snapshot or having them slog through email archives or get cygwin email themselves, it's easier to tell them rollback so they can continue their work. Once I've seen that their problems are addressed (usually by my own testing, hey, I try and keep track of these things), I recommend they upgrade when they have a moment. I know that when things like this break in my *work* environment, the last thing I'd want is to play russian roulette with a snapshot which might make things worse. And if it does, so what? Report, roll back, move on. What's so hard about that? Nothing, but if you're just trying to get back to working and aren't an active developer/maintainer, and don't have the time to test, then why should you try an untested snapshot? I know plenty of people who, on the advice of others, try various pre-releases, invariably trash their setup and have to re-install to fix it. And this isn't just cygwin, but applys to cygwin as well. Unless I know the person in question and what they are capable of, I tent to direct them to the safest option first. If you're not a developer, why not just wait? You certainly can but then you run the risk of your problem not getting fixed even if others think the problem has been fixed. Actually, I would characterize that stance as russian roulette but if that's what you want to do and it works for you, I can't stop you. Why would you want to stop me in the first place? Do you think you know what's best for me? How about for everyone? How about the guy who's on deadline to get a product out and desperately needs his cygwin
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:44:18PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote: I had though that, perhaps, in a fit of displeasure with my email contents of past, you'd setup a filter specifically to block certain emails from me, but I suppose that's just paranoid delusion on my part :) You give yourself *way* too much credit and me way too little. cgf -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:44:18PM -0800, Peter A. Castro wrote: I had though that, perhaps, in a fit of displeasure with my email contents of past, you'd setup a filter specifically to block certain emails from me, but I suppose that's just paranoid delusion on my part :) ~~ see the smiley? You give yourself *way* too much credit and me way too little. On which part? That I am a paranoid delusional or that you did put in a filter just for me? :) Anyway, it was ment as a jest, but perhaps my brand of sarcasm is too raw for most peoples taste. I know how much you'd prefer to have less noise and more signal on the list and sought to poke a little fun at that aspect of it. Oh well. Sorry if I've offended (once again). Oh, and I give you a ton of credit where it really counts: being a huge part of the Heart and Soul of Cygwin. No jest. cgf -- Peter A. Castro [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cats are just autistic Dogs -- Dr. Tony Attwood -- 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/
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under cygwin-1.5.7-1.
OK Peter, clearly you feel strongly about your position and I'm not trying to change that. I'm not suggesting that people should be force-fed Cygwin or it's snapshots. I'm not implying that everyone should be using them all the time. I'm just trying to raise awareness generally of their existence and let people know how they can use them. People will then decide for themselves when is right for them to try them. And we will, of course, continue to encourage people, specifically and in general, to try them when we think they should. :-) But we can't (and won't be trying to) do more than that. Right now, snapshots don't get allot of use, though it is clear that people are getting to know they are there and how to try them out. That's good! I'd like to see that trend continue. We can use all the help we can get. So I'm just trying to encourage people to consider them as an avenue in which they can help improve Cygwin for themselves and for others, if they are so inclined. That's all. But, as you say, the continued discussion isn't very on-topic and probably not of much general interest. So I think it is best to end the discussion now. But if anyone reading this thread (is anyone actually still reading this thread? ;-) ) has questions about snapshots, when they could and should be used, or how they should be used, feel free to send an inquiry to the list (but let's start another thread on it). I don't want anybody to think that snapshots are a no-man's land or something. They are there for anyone that wants them and they're pretty easy and painless to try. Sorry if anyone got hot and bothered by this thread. I didn't think that I was saying anything controversial but I'll admit I'm not always articulate enough to say what's needed clearly the first time. Larry At 05:19 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote: I have to preface this by saying it's quite long and very OT. If you have something better to do, like fixing bugs, by all means skip reading the rest of this. At 01:21 PM 2/12/2004, Peter A. Castro you wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 09:44:26AM -0500, Larry Hall wrote: As I mentioned before, it's better to verify that the current snapshot does address the problem you're seeing locally. Otherwise, if you're seeing a variant or something different than the rest, your problem won't be known until after 1.5.8 is released. See http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ for the latest snapshots you can download and try. Right. This is *exactly* why there are problems with zsh. Someone had an easily reproducible problem that showed up in 1.5.6. Rather than report it they apparently waited for 1.5.7 to show up, assuming that all of their problems would be solved. Well, I would have reported it, but I never had a chance to upgrade to 1.5.6 in the first place (have been too busy with other things), and then along came 1.5.7 any all hell broke loose. For anyone who wants a stable environment, what's the harm in stepping back a version or two so that they can get back to work? I think I answered this in my prior response but I'll clarify. I'm not recommending that people jump head-first into using the latest snapshot and never look back no matter how much trouble they find. It's prudent and recommended to have a backup that you're comfortable with. If you find a problem with the snapshot that significantly impacts your productivity, report it, roll back, and do what you need to do. It's not an all or nothing affair. Of course, if you can help debug, that's great too! Sounds like you recognize all this but I'm just a little concerned Recognize? Hell, I *do* debug! But, debugging isn't for everyone and everyone shouldn't be encouraged to attempt debugging unless they have the skills to do so. that you're giving the impression to others that once you step into the realm of a snapshot, you can't roll back. I'm not trying to debate you on this issue. I feel snapshots are a good thing to try, *if you can afford to do it*. I never stated that you couldn't rollback from a snapshot, given one saves the original version first (and even that's not a requirement), but doing all that is extra effort in the eyes of a non-dev user. By contrast, there have been many snapshots which break in various ways in which case rolling back is the only feasible recourse. I was thinking more along the lines of someone who's been given the cygwin environment to work in, by someone else, and who tried an updated (why? because the could or someone else told them to do so!), but found problems and really doesn't know what to do next. For that person, simply rolling back to a stable version is more expedient and less hassle than hunting for a snapshot and trying it out. Not everyone wants to be a guinea pig, nor should everyone have to be one. This is how my work
Re: zsh-4.1.1-2 still seems broken under Cygwin-1.5.7-1 .
At 05:48 PM 2/11/2004, Morris Siegel you wrote: My PC is running under Windows XP Professional, and until recently with Cygwin-1.5.5-1 and zsh-4.1.1-1 . I upgraded to Cygwin-1.5.6-1, installing everything available, in particular including zsh-4.1.1-2 . zsh behaved in a buggy fashion. I reported it; you kindly replied that similarly problems had been reported by others, and that Cygwin-1.5.7-1 should fix matters. I upgraded to that, and the behavior is improved, but still buggy: (1) sometimes when I start zsh it hangs, sometimes it starts normally; (2) zsh command-line editing generally badly messes up the display when long command lines are being edited. I seem to recall that problem (2) was a consistent nuisance a while back, but then some new Cygwin release (I don't remember which) fixed it. (I generally run zsh under screen, by the way.) The only reason I upgraded from Cygwin-1.5.5 was to have the most up-to-date release; it behaved without problem for me. Is there any way I can restore it? Thanks for your attention and reply. -- Morris M. Siegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sure. Run setup again and downgrade all the packages you upgraded. But you're better off trying a snapshot to see if that fixes any problems you're seeing. Otherwise, the problems may persist beyond 1.5.7. It's good to be moving things forward rather than being stuck in the past. ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/
