On May 29 15:01, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 25.05.2016 um 16:54 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > On May 25 09:56, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > > On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen
> > > wrote:
> > > > On May 24 20:38, Herbert Stocker wrote:
> > > > > On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wro
Am 25.05.2016 um 16:54 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On May 25 09:56, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On May 24 20:38, Herbert Stocker wrote:
On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygw
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 2.6, probably. This is much more than you got back in the days when
> we dropped support for 9x, NT4, W2K ;)
I'll be happy with that :)
-- Erik
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cyg
On May 25 10:22, Erik Soderquist wrote:
> 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 corn
On May 25 09:56, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On May 24 20:38, Herbert Stocker wrote:
> >> On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
> >> > I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
> >>
> >> No, has not yet been re
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 un
On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On May 24 20:38, Herbert Stocker wrote:
>> On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
>> > I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
>>
>> No, has not yet been removed.
>> And i'm sooo happy about this.
>
> Uh oh, bad t
On May 24 20:38, Herbert Stocker wrote:
> On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
> > I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
>
> No, has not yet been removed.
> And i'm sooo happy about this.
Uh oh, bad timing...
The next release 2.5.2 introduces the first non-X
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Erik Soderquist wrote:
> There has been notice that XP support will be dropped at some point in
> the future, but as far as I know, that point has not been reached.
Thanks to those who replied. This will make it easier for me to fix
what I broke.
--
Jim Reiser
On 24.05.2016 18:44, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
No, has not yet been removed.
And i'm sooo happy about this.
Cause i'm still using XP for my work. Deliberately.
Why? Because it's so lightweight in a virtual machine.
Give it only
>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
>> I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
>> Yet the Cygwin home page says:
>>
>> https://cygwin.com/
>>
>> "The Cygwin DLL currently works with all recent, commercially
>> released x86 32 bit and 64 b
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
> I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
> Yet the Cygwin home page says:
>
> https://cygwin.com/
>
> "The Cygwin DLL currently works with all recent, commercially
> released x86 32 bit and 64 bit version
I thought that support for Windows XP had been removed from Cygwin.
Yet the Cygwin home page says:
https://cygwin.com/
"The Cygwin DLL currently works with all recent, commercially
released x86 32 bit and 64 bit versions of Windows, starting with
Windows XP SP3."
I'm happy to be wrong ab
13 matches
Mail list logo
