RE: Cygwin version 1.3.20

2003-07-21 Thread Henry Da Costa
Larry Hall wrote: > Why do you only have the executable? Also, why can't the provider of > this executable give you with the support you need? Strictly > speaking, if the provider hasn't purchased a commercial license from > Red Hat, they are legally bound by the GPL. If they aren't providing >

RE: Cygwin version 1.3.20

2003-07-21 Thread Henry Da Costa
Elfyn McBratney wrote: > I will add this though: If you have a program that worked on 1.3.20* which does > not work on 1.3.22* it's more productive to try and find out the cause of the > problem rather than going back in time. If it turns out to be a problem in the > Cygwin DLL, matbe the royal we

RE: Cygwin version 1.3.20

2003-07-21 Thread Henry Da Costa
Max Bowsher wrote: > You have sent this message to a public mailing list. Thanks for replying. I didn't realize that the "Christopher Faylor" link at http://www.cygwin.com/ led to the cygwin mailing list. I should have been more vigilant. > The phrase "complete Cygwin version 1.3.20 set of packag

Cygwin version 1.3.20

2003-07-21 Thread Henry Da Costa
which we don't have the source. Do you know if that Cygwin version is archived anywhere? Thanks. Henry da Costa Director, Software Development Immersion Corporation -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Doc