Subject: RE: Test: zip-2.31 and unzip-5.52

2006-05-10 Thread Charles D. Russell
Gary van Sickle wrote To the OP (sic!): "Old" != "Well Tested". You should be testing whatever program you're using to do backups, GNU, Cygwin, or otherwise. _ No testing that I could do is as comprehensive as the trial by thousands of users that any new version o

Re: Test: zip-2.31 and unzip-5.52

2006-05-10 Thread Charles D. Russell
Charles Wilson wrote: Do you really think that every cygwin package compiles out-of-box with no changes? _ Not every package, but I would have thought that zip could be written in code that would work on any unix system, and that the standard cygwin installation would p

RE: Test: zip-2.31 and unzip-5.52

2006-05-09 Thread Gary R. Van Sickle
> From: Charles Wilson > Charles D. Russell wrote: > > > I use zip and gzip for backup files, where a bug is unlikely to be > > detected before the problem is catastrophic. Thus I like > to stick to > > old, well-tested versions, and am interested in understanding where > > problems might ar

Re: Test: zip-2.31 and unzip-5.52

2006-05-09 Thread Charles Wilson
Charles D. Russell wrote: I use zip and gzip for backup files, where a bug is unlikely to be detected before the problem is catastrophic. Thus I like to stick to old, well-tested versions, and am interested in understanding where problems might arise. I would have thought that the cygwin exe