Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:05:58 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Windows 95 working again?
Message-ID: <20010808110558.B4406@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20010804193127 DOT A5171 AT redhat DOT com> <Pine DOT NEB DOT 4 DOT 30 DOT 0108080433030 DOT 4299-100000 AT cesium DOT clock DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.30.0108080433030.4299-100000@cesium.clock.org>; from matt@use.net on Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 04:34:08AM -0700

On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 04:34:08AM -0700, Matt wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> I checked in some patches to get Windows 9x working again.  I tried hard
>> for two weeks or more to come up with a plan for Windows 9x that didn't
>> require double copying of the Cygwin heap but, alas, I just couldn't do
>> it.
>>
>> Windows 95 seems carefully designed to give the illusion of functionality
>> while styming real programming at every step.
>>
>> I couldn't duplicate the reported problem of running rsync in /bin/sh so
>> I don't know if this is fixed or not.  Otherwise, I think that cygwin
>> should be functional again.
>>
>> If we can fix the autoconf bug, I'd like to make a release.
>
>I can do some testing in win98 when I get back from europe.
>
>Is win98 more functional than win95 in the respects you mention?

Windows 98/Me == Windows 95

cgf