>
> Well, then there's no way to tell how large the intersection of these
> two sets is, is there?
We'll know once I upgrade to the latest bash. Ideally, we should no longer
need our own private hacks to get bash cross compiling for our arch. If we
do, we'll know which patches still needs to go up
Anirban Sinha wrote:
>> I have fixed all the reported problems like this. Did you send in
>> bug reports?
>
> Ah, that's exciting to know! no, we fixed all of those inhouse :)
Well, then there's no way to tell how large the intersection of these
two sets is, is there?
--
``The lyf so short, t
>
> I have fixed all the reported problems like this. Did you send in
> bug reports?
Ah, that's exciting to know! no, we fixed all of those inhouse :)
Anirban Sinha wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Chet Ramey wrote:
>
>> Anirban Sinha wrote:
>>> Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
>>>
>>> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
>>>
>>> Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
>>>
>>> G
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Chet Ramey wrote:
> Anirban Sinha wrote:
> > Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
> >
> > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
> >
> > Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
> >
> > GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)
Anirban Sinha wrote:
> Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
>
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
>
> Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
>
> GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)-release (mips64-unknown-linux-gnu)
> Copyright (C) 20
Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)-release (mips64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
an
Anirban Sinha wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> This was brought up earlier this year. Unfortunatly, the patch suggested does
> not even compile. Is there any updates on this issue? Was there an updated
> patch that is known to have worked? We are experiencing a
> very similar issue on our box.
The patch post
Hi All:
This was brought up earlier this year. Unfortunatly, the patch suggested does
not even compile. Is there any updates on this issue? Was there an updated
patch that is known to have worked? We are experiencing a
very similar issue on our box.
Thanks,
Ani
l...@xx wrote:
> Configurat
l...@upc.ua wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: x86_64
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64'
> -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu'
> -DCONF_VENDOR='redhat
10 matches
Mail list logo