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
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 11:30:59 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Oops?
Message-ID: <20020804153059.GA1159@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020803163839 DOT 01f9a9d0 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> <3D4C64D5 DOT 22202 DOT 6B6DA6F AT localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3D4C64D5.22202.6B6DA6F@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 11:18:45PM -0700, Stephen C. Biggs wrote:
>I'm not trying to flame you here, please don't get me wrong.  At the
>very least, the DLL is the same as was before.  You DID say that you
>had packaged an obsolete version of the DLL before; is it possible you
>did it again?  Just want to be sure about this.

No one seemed to complain that 1.3.12-2 reported a cygwin-1-3-12-1 CVS
tag.  It's apparently a big deal now, though.

This is the last time I'm going to say it:  The DLL that is available in
cygwin-1.3.12-4 is correct.

cgf

--
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/