Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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: <429F885F.1010801@etr-usa.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 16:29:51 -0600
From: Warren Young <warren AT etr-usa DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050414
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cygwin-L <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Drop Win9x support? (was: Serious performance problems)
References: <14CEE0B69DBDFC41A192613D8B4098CA016595AB AT XCH-CORP DOT staktek DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <14CEE0B69DBDFC41A192613D8B4098CA016595AB@XCH-CORP.staktek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Terry Dabbs wrote:
> 
> I am supporting applications requiring cygwin on '95 and '98 that are
> not going away anytime soon.

That's fine, but do you really need new functionality?

Again, I'm not saying "delete all Cygwin binaries that support Win9x". 
I'm saying "stop requiring Win9x compatibility in new binaries".

--
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/