JTK wrote:
> 1. It appears to not build on the 9x series, only the NT series. That
> kinda sucks, especially since I don't have Why2K at home.
I've built it on 98 and 98SE. You have to set all the switches right though.
> 2. The requirement of command.com/cmd.exe has got to go. Even on NT we
> all know it's a disaster, and is probably the reason behind #1.
Um, no, it's not a disaster.
> 3. Someone still needs to explain to me why the 'wintools' are needed
> when the equivalent (== much better) Cygwin ones are already there.
Let's say this again: They do not server the proper data we need to maintain
maximum XP compatibility. The end.
> 4. Did I see a Win***16*** target in there?!?!? Lord.
Possibly, that that's legacy code. Needs disposed of, soon.
> 5. Someone also needs to explain to me why I can't do a simple 'cvs
> update'. I know there's lots of branches and whatnot - gcc has the same
> issues and yet doesn't have these cvs problems.
Couldn't tell you. I grab the occasional tarball...
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ]
email [ jesusx @ who.net ]
web [ http://burntelectrons.com ] [ Updated April 29, 2001 ]
tag [ The Universe: It's everywhere you want to be. ]
warning [ War doesn't determine who is right, war determines who is left. ]
