X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<45C6A0DC.3010104@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:	Sun, 04 Feb 2007 21:13:32 -0600
From:	"Yaakov (Cygwin Ports)" <yselkowitz AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
User-Agent:	Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Eliminating -mno-cygwin from gcc.
References:	<020d01c748b4$62d8b170$2e08a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <20070205030939 DOT GB24653 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To:	<20070205030939.GB24653@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I think I'd rather wait until some kind of early warning system is
> available in setup.exe than issue a "deprecated" warning which has
> the capacity to propagate everywhere and live for a long time.

Why isn't cygwin-announce sufficient?  We rely on that for everything
else.  I'm just afraid that if the setup.exe patch , if not imminent,
could hold up the gcc development.


Yaakov
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFxqDcpiWmPGlmQSMRCBxWAJ91KwH585WrPDLxeX1bHvizbT2yUgCgsGOB
tL58M1IyYcCHSDGpIYlsJLc=
=jyH9
-----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 -