Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com From: "Robert Collins" To: "'Earnie Boyd'" Subject: RE: New setup.exe snapshot 2.249.2.2 Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 23:41:38 +1000 Message-ID: <007f01c21084$8bc90610$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-reply-to: <3D04AB7F.C82B0788@yahoo.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com > [mailto:cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of Earnie Boyd > Sent: Monday, 10 June 2002 11:37 PM > > > Perhaps a #define UNICODE before #include would help? > > > > We can't rely on the MS layer for unicode on win9x. Doesn't > the above > > require that? I hesitate to look at multiple binaries either :[. > > > > If you wish to continue supporting W9x, and I suppose you do, > perhaps an > alternative binary would suffice, I.E.: A binary with UNICODE and a > binary without UNICODE? I'd rather not do that, at least until we have less wishlist items. The more complexity 'out there', the more support issues. Plus I've not tried a UNICODE build, so it'll probably raise many more issues all of it's own. Rob