ITP dos2unix 5.2.1-1

[Charles Wilson]

On 3/17/2011 4:08 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 03/17/2011 01:56 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> I'm willing to maintain patches for Cygwin, to make the transition
>> easier. But if there is no chance that the package gets accepted, I
>> rather save myself the trouble.
> 
> There's two sets of patches being talked about here:
> 
> 1) What temporary (3-month?) patches are needed to make the dos2unix
> package a drop-in replacement to the existing cygwin dos2unix, so that
> people can start testing if it really was a drop-in.
> 
> 2) What patches (permanent) are worth adding to upstream, to fix
> deficiencies in the usability of upstream when compared to what cygwin has.

OK, everybody, time out for a minute.  Rather than talk vapor, I'll
develop the patches necessary.

The first one, or first set (e.g. #2, above), I'll propose that
"official" upstream dos2unix accept *for all platforms*.  It will not
change upstream's behavior in any way, except for offering some new options.


The second one (#1, above), I'll propose that Erwin use as part of his
initial cygwin package offering.  This one would be only a transitional
measure, and would be slated to be dropped from a later cygwin package
after a certain amount of time has passed.


With regards to the d2u/u2d aliases, for now I'd just modify the cygport
script to create those as hardlinks, and not modify or patch the package
source at all.

Standby...

--
Chuck

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple