X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<444D0635.2060306@ukf.net>
Date:	Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:09:09 +0100
From:	Max Bowsher <maxb1 AT ukf DOT net>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050923 Thunderbird/1.0.7
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Windows 95 support ?
References:	<003101c66774$632f0150$020aa8c0 AT DFW5RB41>
In-Reply-To:	<003101c66774$632f0150$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41>
OpenPGP:	id=C0F2C580
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>> From: Corinna Vinschen
>> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 6:38 AM
>> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>> Subject: Re: Windows 95 support ?
>>
>> On Apr 21 12:59, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Ok, but the question remains: does cygwin still target windows 95?
>> Just the setup tool has some problem, apparently.
>> Cygwin still runs on 95, which will probably change at one 
>> point, since it's getting incredibly awkward to support it.
>>
>>
>> Corinna
>>
> 
> Perhaps, but as long as the Cygwin DLL etc do support 95, it seems that
> Setup should be self contained and not require W95 users (all dozen of them
> ;-)) to hunt down DLLs all over the internet.  Perhaps I'll whip up a
> regular Setup installer which includes the necessary redistributables.

Why bother?

To put this in perspective, this affects only users who are using
Windows 95 original edition (*not* any OSR version), *AND* have not
installed a non-ancient Internet Explorer version.

For this tiny minority, is it *really* worth the confusion of a separate
 Cygwin setup bundle, as compared with the alternative of just writing a
FAQ entry explaining how to get the necessary prerequisites?

Max.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin)

iD8DBQFETQY1fFNSmcDyxYARAlxNAJ91cKKwpDVN6u4tNMOxLzmgo7fIWACfdtKI
WJCi/95aBY3yBoA8mVpuZiw=
=maQh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
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 -