DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=
	default; b=hLI+om2SbQv0nDnOMeSsvXZCOvdZkPbGVkd2RtGQiW9EPLxWI0l1B
	tSvUExlIxMF7ALb55z5OCjgnifco6M7a16AYZ3We+oEkwvthXSzKRYBZ/+diqIEu
	4rHAT+PPwImfe9m1OUUJ0LYmO8qbHdgMcGryj5nSH8nm45E/vh97w4=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 04:21:34 +0100
From: Andrey Gursky <andrey DOT gursky AT e-mail DOT ua>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: cyg Simple <cygsimple AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: WinXP is dead [WAS: 2.6.x: broken compatibility with Wine]
Message-Id: <20161110042134.7411e93fb294a8ea36ae0797@e-mail.ua>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi cyg Simple,

On 11/9/2016 7:59 AM, Andrey Gursky wrote:
>> 
>> P.S. Was it not too early to remove WinXP support? Though it is
>> officially not supported anymore, there are still PCs running WinXP
>> (and Wine). Also there are still systems, I've heard, using some
>> embedded Windows, that shares the same code with WinXP, thus making it
>> not yet truly obsolete. Additionally a lot of work has been done by
>> Cygwin contributors to support this OS and I believe the most of bugs
>> have been workarounded, while due to stopped development it is not
>> likely one has to spend time solving new problems. So was it really
>> worth to drop the hardly crafted code? Are there already some
>> worthwhile advantages? Why wasn't it possible to switch Cygwin WinXP
>> support to just "not officially supported"? (kindly asking)
> 
> This has been answered.  The problem with supporting XP into infinitude
> is that every application would need to agree to do the same.
> Improvements to the OS API would not be able to be used so there are
> trade-offs for the continued support of an OS that is no longer
> supported.  The code becomes unwieldy to maintain because a change needs
> to be tested on other systems.  Security maintenance becomes impossible
> because the OS vendor no longer supports the older OS.  There is the
> cygwin time machine, USE IT if you need old software for old OS.

Thanks for your reply (however I haven't received it, because you
likely didn't click on "reply all"?).

Do you refer to the recent message [1]?

Regarding cygwin time machine. I can't use it, since cygwin is compiled
for MSYS2. And then it is being run under Wine on GNU/Linux. While
WinXP is still not dead, Wine is definitively not an old OS. It's just
an active project doing WinAPI implementation from scratch according to
documentation. Thus I hope Cygwin developers could talk directly to
Wine ones to find the minimum needed changes in both projects.

Regards,
Andrey

[1] Re: New Cygwin "setup" program useless on my Win-XP box. Not very
    nice at all.
    https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2016-11/msg00060.html

--
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