X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Thu, 2 Feb 2006 20:38:42 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: mismatched dll
Message-ID:	<20060203013842.GB7678@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<020220062158 DOT 387 DOT 43E28079000ACE870000018322007507440A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net> <20060203013712 DOT GC17485 AT brasko DOT net>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20060203013712.GC17485@brasko.net>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 08:37:12PM -0500, Bob Rossi wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 09:58:17PM +0000, Eric Blake wrote:
>>There's always another alternative - propose to maintain your package
>>as part of the official cygwin distribution.  Then you just point
>>people to cygwin.com, and source code distribution becomes cygwin.com's
>>problem instead of yours.
>
>OK, here I do have some evidence to support me when I say you are
>partially wrong.
>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-08/msg00064.html So, that is
>not a good alternative.

I retract my veto.  If this is submitted via normal channels, I will have
no objections.

cgf

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

- Raw text -