This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk@cygwin.com
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: w32api usr/include/sqlext.h bad macros
- From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <sthoenna at efn dot org>
- To: cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 13:19:26 -0800
- Subject: Re: w32api usr/include/sqlext.h bad macros
- Organization: bs"d
- References: <20041206231117.GA18146@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <E1CbULb-00068A-00@mastermind.netrics.internal>
- Reply-to: Talk Amongst Yourselves <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 08:40:59PM -0500, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:41:02PM -0500, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> > >The following was rejected on cygwin-patches. I'm intentionally posting
> > >to the wrong list now because I shouldn't have to subscribe to a mailing
> > >list just to report a bug!
> >
> > Since cygwin-patches isn't a "bug reporting" mailing list and since the below
> > isn't "a patch",
>
> It's a line by line description of what needs to be changed to fix a
> bug. That it's not a "Larry Wall format" patch doesn't make it any
> less of a patch.
>
> The mailing list description page says not to mail such things to this
> list.
>
> > I'd say that that the system was working as designed.
>
> Hardly.
I'd like to step in here to point out that the system isn't without
flaw; I had a similar experience to Eric's. Noted a minor bug in a
header, created a (real) patch file, and had to subscribe to send it
to cygwin-patches. Being a clueless newbie, I of course didn't
include a changelog entry. So, if all were working as designed, I
would have been yelled at (err, gently corrected), and made to
resubmit. But ....
drumroll...
instead, Corinna just applied it. Someone must have been asleep at
the wheel is all I can say. Just plain broken.