Kris Warkentin wrote:
> Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> Kris Warkentin wrote:
>>> I've successfully brought the patch for the older bash-2.04 forward
>>> and attached it here. The patch applies to the mainline
>>> bash-2.05b.tar.gz. If msys is a special target, perhaps we should
>>> submit a patch to the autoconf people to add it to the default
>>> config.sub/config.guess so that we don't have to specially patch
>>> sources to be recongnized by configure scripts. Anyway, if you were
>>> thinking of upgrading shells, this one seems to work fine. Is
>>> anyone interested in submitting this to the bash-maintainers?
>> Since MSYS is an internal target, no it should not be submitted to
>> config-patches, IMO.
> Which brings up some questions. Let me know if this is documented
> somewhere but I noticed that (some?) things built under the msysdvlpr
> have dependencies on the msys dll. Does that provide a subset of unix
> features like cygwin1.dll?
msys-1.0.dll is a fork of Cygwin 1.3.3.
> I'm looking at various porting methods and wondering if it's better to
> build under the straight msys environment to avoid extra dll
If the program uses scripts that might embed posix paths, then you
should use msysdvlpr.
>> You may have the honors of submitting the patch to the bash
>> maintainer if you wish. I haven't looked at the patch, there may be
>> some Cygwin specific code that Cygwin contributors have ownership to.
> Much of the patch seems to be changing #ifdef CYGWIN to #if
> defined(CYGWIN) || defined (MSYS). I think I'd be much happier to
> submit something that compiles under the normal msys environment than
> only under msysdvlpr. I just don't know how much work that is.
For bash, at the present, that isn't going to happen easily, it is the
reason I used a fork of Cygwin.
>> Have you testing your patch on Win98?
> Unfortunately I don't have access to win98 (do people still use
> that?). One odd thing I noticed though: when I replace bash-2.04
> with 2.05b on my system, gdb starts crashing on startup. I haven't
> had a chance to investigate further but I'm wondering if it might be
> some sort of versionitus between what I've installed and what I've built.
Yes, and some even use Win95. I don't know what your problem might be.
> Here's another question. When doing a ./configure, I often get popups
> from the msdos 16-bit subsystem complaining about rxvt having done
> something illegal. Anyone know anything about that? Sorry about the
> sparse details - I'm home sick and don't have access to that machine
> right now.
What version of MSYS are you using?