Message-ID: <37CABF35.31A77786@softhome.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:28:21 +0200
From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: lt,en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC: DJGPP Workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: symlink() & is_v2_prog() question
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990830190800 DOT 10193F-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 30 Aug 1999, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> 
> > > Call me a coward.  I'm afraid to break a good thing that DJGPP is now.
> >
> > I understand you. So symlinks will wait. For a long time.
> 
> No, that's not what I meant to say.  I was just explaining my views.
> However, I won't dream dictating my views to the rest if I'm the only one
> who shares them.

No, you do have a point, I don't say that waiting is a bad thing.

> So if you want to work on this, please do.  If nobody else besides me
> objects, your work will be included in v2.04.

BTW, what's criterion for bumping middle DJGPP version number? I mean,
how big changes should be for 2.10 release?

Laurynas Biveinis