Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20020301110418.0243f488@pop.ma.ultranet.com>
X-Sender: lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 11:15:52 -0500
To: David Starks-Browning <starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
Subject: RE: Is the Cygwin 1.3.2 DLL Win 2000 compatible?
In-Reply-To: <7840-Fri01Mar2002125942+0000-starksb@ebi.ac.uk>
References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20020228173048 DOT 024373c8 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
 <570DA4A1BC7DD4119AD7000629551498013E10E1 AT pjmnt11 DOT pjm DOT com>
 <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20020228173048 DOT 024373c8 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:59 AM 3/1/2002, David Starks-Browning wrote:
>On Thursday 28 Feb 02, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) writes:
> > David (Starks-Browning), do you think it's necessary to update this 
> > FAQ entry so that it's clear that the Cygwin DLL has historically supported
> > the then released versions of Windows?
>
>Larry,
>
>I don't understand what's wrong with the current FAQ entry.  Maybe I
>misunderstand the question?
>
>Thanks,
>David



Hi David,

Perhaps.  It's an esoteric one.  The original poster of this question wanted
to know if Cygwin 1.3.2 would work with Win2000.  I replied with the FAQ 
entry that says Cygwin works with 9x/Me/NT/W2K/XP.  The reply I got back 
from the poster then was that he had seen this entry but thought it 
referenced only the current Cygwin DLL (1.3.9 at that point).  So the only
question I was raising was whether you think it would be more or less 
confusing to people to add some wording to the FAQ entry that specifies
that any recent Cygwin DLL works with Windows, not just the latest.
It's not clear to me that this additional wording wouldn't raise more 
questions than it answers.  Judging by your response, I think leaving things
as is may be the best option.  What do you think?

  

Larry Hall                              lhall AT rfk DOT com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/