X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4A7B10B2.7000303@bmts.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:19:46 -0400
From: Ralph Hempel <rhempel AT bmts DOT com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: mintty doesn't run on NT4 due to lack of GetConsoleWindow
References: <20090806044706 DOT GA2009 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <416096c60908060418p70329409q751c2a3735167998 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20090806145908 DOT GA3130 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To: <20090806145908.GA3130@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-brucetelecom.com-MailScanner-Information: Please contact Bruce Telecom 519.368.2000 for more information
X-brucetelecom.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-brucetelecom.com-MailScanner-From: rhempel AT bmts DOT com
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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

Christopher Faylor wrote:

>> (And to be honest I don't see the point in Cygwin 1.7 still supporting
>> NT4. Anyone willing to stick with an OS that's been unsupported for
>> five years should be more than happy to stick with Cygwin 1.5.)
> 
> I know it's unsupported but people still use it and, perhaps more
> unimportantly, it really is a pretty nice OS.  The UI isn't bad and it's
> pretty responsive.  So, I guess it's a "would be nice".  I also noted
> yesterday that X doesn't work there due to an illegal instruction.  I don't
> exactly understand why that is yet.

Not to be too OT, but I remember getting demos of NT back in the days
of 90 MHz Pentium machines and being very unimpressed.

I run Win2K on a VM under XP on a laptop and it's really fast.

Maybe the hardware has finally caught up to the software :-)

Ralph

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple