This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: OT: possible project/research project
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- To: "Randall R Schulz" <rrschulz at cris dot com>,<cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 06:12:26 +1100
- Subject: RE: OT: possible project/research project
Randall..
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:rrschulz@cris.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:47 AM
> To: Robert Collins; cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: OT: possible project/research project
> >No - sounds like you haven't been paying attention. In my very first
> >email I pointed out that this was not an acceptable
> approach, and that
> >committing changes upstream would be the only meaningful way
> of doing
> >this.
>
> Are you saying you think you're going to convince the
> maintainers of these
> special programs that have been endowed with the ability to operate
> parasitically in your special version of the shell to let you
> put these
> changes into their mainline code bases? Good luck!
I'm saying that not doing that makes the maintenance untenable - at
first, second and third glance. If it's not a good enough model with
real enough potential for them to agree, then it's not worth doing.
> >Nearly everyone here does - most scripts have #!/bin/sh in
> the header.
>
> Perhaps. I do, but only until I want to use a BASH feature
> that ash doesn't
> have.
> >"The best is the enemy of the good."
> >- Voltaire "
>
> Yes, yes. I've been around long enough to have heard all of these.
>
> Don't forget this:
>
> "... this is the best of all possible worlds."
> -- Voltaire
Yup... and murphy was an optimist!.
Oh, for the objectivity thing.... yes I'm defending it, but I'm not in
love with it per se - that more acceptable?
Rob
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/