X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:35:45 +0200 From: Samuel Thibault To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Windows 95 support ? Message-ID: <20060424173545.GN4434@implementation.labri.fr> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <003101c66774$632f0150$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41> <444D0635.2060306@ukf.net> <20060424172251.GC3890@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20060424172251.GC3890@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Christopher Faylor, le Mon 24 Apr 2006 13:22:51 -0400, a écrit : > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 06:09:09PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote: > >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? > > IMO, no. I don't think there's much use in officially distributing a > separate bundle for those Windows 95 users who haven't upgraded their > system for 10+ years. > > OTOH, if Gary wants to provide a download bundle to help these people > out, then, obviously, that's fine. I just don't think it's something > that we will make officially available. But the question is: isn't it easy to avoid using windows features that appeared after windows95? Regards, Samuel -- 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/