Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-Id:	<4.3.1.2.20020304102158.024a7008@pop.ma.ultranet.com>
X-Sender:	lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com
X-Mailer:	QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
Date:	Mon, 04 Mar 2002 10:22:26 -0500
To:	David Starks-Browning <starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
Subject:	RE: Is the Cygwin 1.3.2 DLL Win 2000 compatible?
In-Reply-To:	<3578-Sun03Mar2002085418+0000-starksb@ebi.ac.uk>
References:	<4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20020301110418 DOT 0243f488 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
	<4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20020228173048 DOT 024373c8 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
	<570DA4A1BC7DD4119AD7000629551498013E10E1 AT pjmnt11 DOT pjm DOT com>
	<4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20020301110418 DOT 0243f488 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0

At 03:54 AM 3/3/2002, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Friday 1 Mar 02, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) writes:
> > Perhaps.  It's an esoteric one.  The original poster of this question wanted
> > to know if Cygwin 1.3.2 would work with Win2000.  I replied with the FAQ 
> > entry that says Cygwin works with 9x/Me/NT/W2K/XP.  The reply I got back 
> > from the poster then was that he had seen this entry but thought it 
> > referenced only the current Cygwin DLL (1.3.9 at that point).  So the only
> > question I was raising was whether you think it would be more or less 
> > confusing to people to add some wording to the FAQ entry that specifies
> > that any recent Cygwin DLL works with Windows, not just the latest.
> > It's not clear to me that this additional wording wouldn't raise more 
> > questions than it answers.  Judging by your response, I think leaving things
> > as is may be the best option.  What do you think?
>
>I think it's best to leave this entry as it is.


Very good.  Thanks for the 'ruling'. :-)



Larry Hall                              lhall AT rfk DOT com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -