Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Message-Id: <200006131745.AA00397@mlx.com> Content-Type: text/plain Mime-Version: 1.0 (NeXT Mail 3.3 v148.2.1) From: MarketLogix Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:45:09 -0700 To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: Is -mno-cygwin support being removed???? Reply-To: mlx AT san DOT rr DOT com References: <3946544E DOT 6AC55632 AT objectcentral DOT com> <39466928 DOT C8C011D3 AT carlthompson DOT net> Not just you man ... I'm always reluctant to upgrade for fear that something subtle that I've come to depend on will stop working or, even worse, work just (slightly) differently. I've come to depend on this stuff and its free so I'm not gonna bitch. Nope, I just sit back quietly and live with it - still VERY glad that it exists, even such that it is. There is, no doubt, a "fix it or shut up cause its free" attitude here. I'm not saying that its wrong (I'm really not!) but I do believe its here & here to stay !!! This issue has been danced around for the last couple of years now in many incarnations. Its always the same, a new release, a barrage of email problems, veteran Cygwinners telling the hapless to stop whining & go look it up. Hey, I'm not that experienced with this OpenSource stuff, maybe thats the way it s'posed to be. Having said all that, I will attempt to upgrade again as soon as I get well-rested and about 4-5 days with a very low potential workload. I just don't have the time or brain capacity to drop yet another layer down in my toolkit to learn Cygwin in any real(or imagined) depth. If that makes me a freeloader, then I'm sorry. I did what I could, I bought the CD. All told, I truly believe that this is, by far, the best solution of its kind on the planet, AFAIK there is not even a close second - keep up the good work. I know you're all having fun. Viva la Cygwin !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bisk Begin forwarded message: Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:02:32 -0700 From: Carl Thompson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686) To: "Bruce E. Wampler" Cc: Cygwin List Subject: Re: Is -mno-cygwin support being removed???? I am one of the core developers of the FLTK GUI toolkit and we are in much the same bind as you are. We've relied on Cygwin as a major part of our Windows platform support in the past and it would be nice if it worked now. And before some zealous person says "it's open source so fix it yourself" I don't think that's reasonable. I don't know the Cygwin code, I've never built the Cygwin code and I don't know the GCC code. The Cygwin developers could fix it better, faster and more cleanly than I if they choose to. If there were a bug in FLTK that caused previously working applications to fail, I would feel honor bound to fix it because I realize that real people depend on it. I certainly would not say "well, I don't feel like fixing my bug myself because you and your code are not important to me so you should fix my code for me and if your fix is up to my standards I might consider incoporating it." I hear a lot of that here. Not all Cygwin developers want to develop Cygwin. Personally, I feel that if you release something to the open source community and ask people to use it, then you have a social obligation to the community to keep that product working reasonably, and that includes the timely fixing of bugs that don't affect you personally. But that's just me, I guess. Carl Thompson -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com