X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-12.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered:	true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:	AgEFADzju0+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABEhS2tW4EMgQeCFQEBAQMBEgEQDQRFBQ0BHQUCBgYYAgIDAUcBDgEEGxqHZwQBmmSNFJJZgSaJYoQpMmIDiEOaZYFkgwo
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	64-bit Cygwin packages (was RE: Is the Latest Release of Cygwin supported on Windows Server 8/2012)
Date:	Tue, 22 May 2012 12:06:18 -0700
Message-ID:	<70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C31348C6E2@xmb-sjc-233.amer.cisco.com>
From:	"Matt Seitz (matseitz)" <matseitz AT cisco DOT com>
To:	"Cygwin-L" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc:	"Warren Young" <warren AT etr-usa DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
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
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id q4MJ6gAA007682

> From: Cygwin-L On Behalf Of Warren Young
> 
> I would say that the vast majority of the packages in the Cygwin
> distribution could not reasonably make use of 64-bit data spaces.
> 
> However, one of your arguments in this thread cuts both ways: the fact
> that there are a few packages that reasonably can do so means you cannot
> say "we don't need it".

If someone wants a 64-bit version of a packages in the distribution, then how about they build a 64-bit version of the package and report the results?  That would give the distribution maintainers actual data about the costs and benefits.

- Raw text -