Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/08/22/06:23:53
2009/8/22 Christopher Faylor:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:35:20PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:05:44PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>>>On 21/08/2009 03:44, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>Erm... =A0sorry, but why would you want to do this? =A0Either you have a
>>>>1.5 based installation running a 1.5 perl, or you have a 1.7 based
>>>>installation running a 1.7 perl. =A0If you have two independent Cygwin
>>>>trees, one 1.5 and one 1.7, then there won't be any collision either.
>>>>I really don't understand what that's good for.
>>>
>>>A lot of unnecessary work on my end, perhaps? =A0I'm with you on this
>>>one; please do NOT do this.
>>
>>Ditto. =A0I thought we'd already gone down this path and decided not to
>>make tests based on the cygwin version number. =A0Presumably configure
>>should be smart enough and fine-grained enough to make the required
>>decisions without this.
>
> Sorry. =A0I pullled in configure here when it didn't make a lot of sense
> but I really don't like the notion of using the cygwin version number
> in any type of configuration.
Your wish is my command.
So I will not change it.
perl-5.10.1 will be released in a couple of days.
--=20
Reini Urban
http://phpwiki.org/ http://murbreak.at/
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -