Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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, 9 Feb 2003 00:18:49 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Btw Message-ID: <20030209051849.GC20171@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20030209050710 DOT GA20142 AT redhat DOT com> <020c01c2cff9$bec0ade0$6b7c86d9 AT webdev> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <020c01c2cff9$bec0ade0$6b7c86d9@webdev> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 05:11:46AM -0000, Elfyn McBratney wrote: >> I think this is the first cygwin release that has reached "20" since >> B20. I hope that's a good sign. > >Does that mean that instead of "1.3.20 is mashed...I'm going back to B20" >it'll be "3.9.450 is mullered I'm rolling back to 1.3.20"? ;-) Something like that. Or, maybe when people start talking about B20 we can say: "You mean 1.3.20, right?" "Uh, right, I think." "Ok. You should definitely drop back to *20, then." At least that will get people into this millenium. Hmm. I think I'll have to build one massive .exe file with the whole cygwin distribution in it for this subterfuge to work. "Um, I don't think it took 18 hours for B20 to load before." 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/