X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFADzju0+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABEhS2tW4EMgQeCFQEBAQMBEgEQDQRFBQ0BHQUCBgYYAgIDAUcBDgEEGxqHZwQBmmSNFJJZgSaJYoQpMmIDiEOaZYFkgwo Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: 64-bit Cygwin packages (was RE: Is the Latest Release of Cygwin supported on Windows Server 8/2012) Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:06:18 -0700 Message-ID: <70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C31348C6E2@xmb-sjc-233.amer.cisco.com> From: "Matt Seitz (matseitz)" To: "Cygwin-L" Cc: "Warren Young" X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id q4MJ6gAA007682 > From: Cygwin-L On Behalf Of Warren Young > > I would say that the vast majority of the packages in the Cygwin > distribution could not reasonably make use of 64-bit data spaces. > > However, one of your arguments in this thread cuts both ways: the fact > that there are a few packages that reasonably can do so means you cannot > say "we don't need it". If someone wants a 64-bit version of a packages in the distribution, then how about they build a 64-bit version of the package and report the results? That would give the distribution maintainers actual data about the costs and benefits.