This is the mail archive of the cygwin-patches mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 2017-11-13 10:12, Brian Inglis wrote: > On 2017-11-13 05:05, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Nov 13 00:04, Brian Inglis wrote: >>> On 2017-11-12 16:02, Ken Brown wrote: >>>> On 11/12/2017 4:27 PM, Brian Inglis wrote: >>>>> + <para>Some ancient Cygwin releases asked users to report problems that were >>>>> + difficult to diagnose to the mailing list with the message:</para> >>>>> + >>>>> + <screen>find_fast_cwd: WARNING: Couldn't compute FAST_CWD pointer. Please >>>>> report >>>>> + this problem to the public mailing listcygwin@cygwin.com</screen> >>>>> + >>>>> + <para>These problems were fixed long ago in updated Cygwin releases.</para> >>>> >>>> The wording of the warning message was changed 3 years ago, in commit 0793492. >>>> I'm not sure that qualifies as ancient. I also don't think it's accurate to >>>> refer to the problem as "difficult to diagnose" or to say that the problems >>>> "were fixed long ago". >>> >>> The original message was added in 2011 - 1.7.10 maybe earlier - NT4 support was >>> dropped around then - pretty ancient in Cygwin terms of how many Windows >>> releases have had support dropped since then! >>> >>>> The issue (Corinna will correct me if I'm wrong) is simply that new releases of >>>> Windows sometimes require changes in how Cygwin finds the fast_cwd pointer. So >>>> users of old versions of Cygwin on new versions of Windows might have problems, >>>> and this can certainly happen again in the future. But the FAQ doesn't need to >>>> go into that. Why not just say what the warning currently says (see >>>> path.cc:find_fast_cwd()): >>>> >>>> "This typically occurs if you're using an older Cygwin version on a newer >>>> Windows. Please update to the latest available Cygwin version from >>>> https://cygwin.com/. ; If the problem persists, please see >>>> https://cygwin.com/problems.html." >>>> >>>> You can also add your sentence about contacting the vendor who provided the old >>>> Cygwin release. >>> >>> We are trying in the FAQ entry to persuade an annoyed user that it may be in >>> their best interest to do some remediation, rather than just complain in an >>> email to an org they think is a company (cygwin.com) they have never heard of, >>> who they expect from their application message to take care of their problem >>> with no other effort on their part, and who they can blame if nothing happens. >>> >>> Assuming they find the FAQ entry, emphatic language may persuade them to do >>> something more than the message says they should do. >> >> Nevertheless, Ken has a point. >> >> s/ancient/older and the text should really explain the "older Cygwin on >> newer Windows" problem without necessarily going into too much detail. >> "The problem has been fixed" just doesn't fit the facts. > > I guess I may have been a little enthusiastic to get something out there we > could refer to in future - and reduce the annoyance level for both posters and > subscribers - attaching a hopefully more accurate diff for comment, also > addressing some of the other points I suggested. Made all URIs in messages links, fixed tags, links, improved flow and wording. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Attachment:
0001-add-FAQ-How-do-I-fix-find_fast_cwd-warnings.patch
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |