On 10/06/2024 05:47, Mark Geisert wrote:
Upgrade the note about 32-bit Cygwin to a full question and answer(s).
Also close a couple of HTML tags that need it.
Thanks for this.
I'm minded to apply something like this, but you might care to revise it
in light of my comments below.
---
install.html | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/install.html b/install.html
index cdb9948b..c948e647 100755
--- a/install.html
+++ b/install.html
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ version for an old, unsupported Windows?</h2>
</p>
<p>
Also use <code>--no-verify</code> with this URL.
- </p
+ </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ version for an old, unsupported Windows?</h2>
64-bit:
http://ctm.crouchingtigerhiddenfruitbat.org/pub/cygwin/circa/64bit/2016/08/30/104235
<p>
Also use <code>--no-verify</code> with these URLs.
- </p
+ </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
@@ -273,15 +273,23 @@ version for an old, unsupported Windows?</h2>
Time Machine</a> for providing this archive.
</p>
- <h4>A note about 32-bit Cygwin</h4>
+<h2 class="cartouche" id="unsup32bit">Q: Can I still run unsupported 32-bit
Cygwin?</h2>
+
+ <p>
+ A1: You can, but why would you? 32-bit Cygwin was frozen at version
Answering a question with a question seems like bad style.
There are (what seems like to the asker) legitimate reasons for using
32-bit Cygwin.
I'm not sure if we want to discuss them here, or just say "We don't
advise it, but if you really think you have to..."
+ 3.3.6, around August 2022. There have been and there will be no bug
+ fixes or security updates, and no new functionality added. No longer
+ supported on the mailing lists; it has joined the choir invisible.
+ </p>
Haha! I know it's dull, but in the interests of clarity, I don't think
this is appropriate here. :)
