On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Uh oh, bad timing... > > > > The next release 2.5.2 introduces the first non-XP compatible code. > > It's in a seldom used corner of the code and it doesn't require > > functions unavailable on XP, so it will very likely not break 99% of the > > existing applications yet. > > > > But the next release after will very likely break XP support entirely. > > Would this be something to move to 3.x because there seems to be a lot > of people who come onto the list a lot. That way they know they can > use 2.5.1 and that is the last 'stable' release they need to 'fork' > from as say Cygnus-XP1 to keep going?
I like this idea. I too have some isolated XP VM stations (mine deliberately have zero network connection; "defender updates" do NOT close security holes) that I currently plan to continue using until I've learned enough programming myself to rewrite the windows only utilities I have running in these stations. A version change from from 2.x to 3.x at the official end of XP support would make it a very clean marker. -- Erik -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple