On 26 August 2015 at 07:42, Andrey Repin <anrdae...@yandex.ru> wrote: > Greetings, Stephen John Smoogen! > >>> Anyway, on the topic: All I could ask is to give us a notice when the final >>> build for XP is available, so that we could prepare own mirrors. > >> You will need more than mirrors. You will need to set up a parallel >> stack of builders and other tools because this will be a fork of >> anything compiled against Cygwin from then on. You will also need to >> look at how you are handling any bugs or problems utilities have in >> rebuilding (but that is a longer term issue). Having had to do this in >> the past, it will be better if you try to call this something >> different. The reason being is that if you keep the name then when a >> support ticket comes in from a user with Cygwin is it yours.. is it >> the one they downloaded from the main site.. is it a version in >> between? > > You're misunderstanding my daily use of Cygwin. I'm not compiling anything, > not cygwin-related anyway. > I'm using it as a bridging gap between sane scripting abilities of dash/make > and insane requirements of compiling tools such as BRCC. > And since Vista+ doesn't have support for 16-bit subsystem, I need XP VM to > compile my projects. >
Ah ok. If it is just a one man operation then an archive of the trees at a certain time are all that is needed. If you have a large Windows XP environment you are rolling out something to then you need to make sure you can compile and deal with the 'forked' version... which I am guessing that some segment of XP admins have to do. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- 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
