On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 11:49:43AM -0500, Chris Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 11:44:36AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > >Would you be willing to to consider the following: > > > > http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-10/msg00116.html > > > >Or, is it too esoteric for you? > > Judging by the description, that sounds more like a patch for the FSF > inetutils maintainer than for the Cygwin inetutils maintainer.
I agree. I don't really want to add functionality besides what is normal for this inetutils. In the long run, we should consider to get rid of this inetutils anyway and substitute them by a new version started via cygrunsrv or sysvinit resp. Oh btw... wouldn't you better like to maintain ProFTPd for Cygwin? ;-) Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
