X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:22:51 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Windows 95 support ?
Message-ID: <20060424172251.GC3890@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <003101c66774$632f0150$020aa8c0 AT DFW5RB41> <444D0635 DOT 2060306 AT ukf DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <444D0635.2060306@ukf.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
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

On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 06:09:09PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>For this tiny minority, is it *really* worth the confusion of a
>separate Cygwin setup bundle, as compared with the alternative of just
>writing a FAQ entry explaining how to get the necessary prerequisites?

IMO, no.  I don't think there's much use in officially distributing a
separate bundle for those Windows 95 users who haven't upgraded their
system for 10+ years.

OTOH, if Gary wants to provide a download bundle to help these people
out, then, obviously, that's fine.  I just don't think it's something
that we will make officially available.

cgf

--
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/