Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Default option settings
- X-seq: zsh-workers 2609
- From: Zoltan Hidvegi <hzoli@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: coleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Coleman)
- Subject: Re: Default option settings
- Date: Sun, 22 Dec 1996 04:03:49 +0100 (MET)
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <199612211629.LAA25243@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> from Richard Coleman at "Dec 21, 96 11:29:16 am"
> Also, Zoltan, I noticed you named the new beta as just zsh-3.1.0.
> You should probably call it something like zsh-3.1-beta1, or put
> it in a testing subdirectory. I expect plenty of people will not
> realize it's a beta version. Many people will not see that it's
> symlink'ed to zsh-beta and install it as a production version.
The beta status is mentioned at the very beginning of the README and in the
announcement. The 3.1.0 version number has several advantages:
1. it is easier to parse from a script
2. it is now identical to the RCS branch revision number
3. it is compatible with the Linux version numbering :-)
I can rename the tar.gz distribution to something like
zsh-3.1.1-beta.tar.gz and leave the ZSH_VERSION variable as 3.1.1.
> (We all know there are plenty of incompetent sysadmins out there).
Yes, unfortunately :-((. I know several Unix sysadmins who do not know
even the very basics of Unix. But these sysadmins rarely try to install
zsh. And even if they install, zsh-3.1.0 should be quite stable without
--enable-dynamic (it's not the default for exactly this reason).
Zoltan
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author