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: Fri, 28 May 2004 21:46:34 +0200 From: Baurjan Ismagulov To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: dll version collision Message-ID: <20040528194634.GA1325@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20040527212657 DOT GC2617 AT ata DOT cs DOT hun DOT edu DOT tr> <7F99F48A-B0C5-11D8-BB92-000A95C4BF56 AT cipheroptics DOT com> <20040528171500 DOT GC26698 AT coe DOT bosbc DOT com> <20040528190550 DOT GB5391 AT coe DOT bosbc DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040528190550.GB5391@coe.bosbc.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-IsSubscribed: yes Hello, Christopher! On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:05:50PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > You use the same technique as if you were testing another version of > linux. Or you'd backup your system prior to updating cygwin. It is not > likely that you could have two installations running on the same system > with no bleed between them. Well, with UML I have a reasonable environment to test most of things I have to deal with. I would be happy to see the same for cygwin. > Having two versions of cygwin working at the same time is not a goal > for the cygwin project. Does this mean that if someone comes with a clean patch doing that, it would not be accepted? Once it were there, it wouldn't require maintenance, any kind of user support can be explicitly disclaimed. What kind of problems do you expect? With kind regards, Baurjan. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/