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
Message-ID: <20020820182214.97433.qmail@web21006.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nicholas Wourms <nwourms AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject: RE: newbie's gripe with NT/2K/XP integration
To: the_real_genneth <the_real_genneth AT hotmail DOT com>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <000001c2486a$9b1c6da0$3827baac@GENNETH8691>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


--- the_real_genneth <the_real_genneth AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:
> >> [snip] removing support for 9x would make cygwin code
> >> smaller and neater (i'm an advocate of _very_ elegant coding),
> not to
> >> mention faster and more secure (what do you know, i mentioned
> them
> >> anyway :).
> >
> >Why don't you do it and report back to the list on the speed
> gains?
> 
> I intend to do that as soon as I have time. Exams weigh heavily on
> the
> mind of small time fiddlers such as me.
> 
> >
> >There are security problems with Cygwin that have nothing to do
> with
> the
> >non-NT Windows.
> 
> I understand that. And I also understand that there _are_ security
> problems with Cygwin that have something to do with non-NT Windows.

Well you can just cut the BS right now!  There are many things about
Cygwin that need improvement, but dropping Win9X is stupid.  Some of
us, myself included, have opted to not upgrade to 2000/XP.  Frankly,
I could care less about security.  Also berating a project on your
first post is definitely a bad move, because you alienate the people
you are trying to communicate with.  Besides, the different versions
of Windows have identifiers, so any security related code can be
easily #ifdef'd or something similar.

I'm here, using an Athlon 1.3ghz 320MB ram, trying to run a configure
that runs slow as dog sh$t (what I'd expect from a 486/20), but you
don't hear me griping.  So rather then being part of the problem, try
to be part of the solution.  If you see security holes, fix 'em and
submit a patch.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

--
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/