help/version patches

Christopher Faylor cgf@redhat.com
Mon Feb 25 13:05:00 GMT 2002


On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 01:23:51PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>Well, cygpath is wrong.  cygcheck is wrong too, under this scenario,
>but not quite as wrong since it at leasts puts the version in its own
>string.  I believe, it used to do something similar to cygpath but I
>changed it, intending to, someday, make it use cvs versions.

Sorry, I forgot to use the word "IMO" in the above.  Obviously there are
one of many ways to do this.  I think the "const char version[]" at the
top and cvs id in the version is the best.  However, I'm guilty of doing
it the "wrong" way myself.

cgf



More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list