On 2/7/2011 3:50 PM, Angelo Graziosi wrote: > I do not understand the logic here: break GCC trunk for something that > hasn't been yet released. > > Often new Cygwin version was announced as imminent and the true release > delayed for months..
Never happened. Even the interminable 1.7.0 release was never announced as "coming by such-and-such-date"...until it was actually released. It is actually VERY rare for the cygwin maintainers to EVER give any sort of ETA on a new release. In a suprising move, they have done so for 1.7.8 -- specifically in response to a Q by Dave K about this exact fenv.h issue. http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2011-01/msg00325.html "Early Feb is more likely. From my POV there's just that new issue with stdio blocking each other" > (This time the announce was for 01 or 02 February.. and up today, 07, > nothing happened.) "Early Feb" == 01 or 02, but not 03 or 07? > GCC maintainers is this OK for your policy? Seems like that would be up to the judgement of the (cygwin) platform maintainer for gcc...which boils down to Dave K. Since he's the guy that actually made the commit, you can probably assume he was ok with it. -- Chuck
