On Sun, 6 May 2007, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
* Thomas Dickey (Sun, 6 May 2007 13:36:31 -0400 (EDT))
On Sun, 6 May 2007, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
You are confusing things. Quoting you: '"support" is relative. There's
apparently no X maintainer [...]'. If you don't 'care for the role of
"cygwin maintainer"' then that's obviously nonsense as X is maintained
upstream.
not at all: X upstream doesn't maintain the Cygwin X server.
(nothing's preventing them from doing that, but it's not the same as
actually doing it).
Again, if there were an upstream _maintainer_ for rxvt (the point of this
thread), they'd have done something useful with the win32 bits mentioned.
Why would the upstream rxvt maintainer support ("do something useful")
with the Cygwin rxvt port when the X upstream maitainer doesn't?!
Note that I underlined _maintainer_.
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/
FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
