Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think this is how the BitKeeper folks do it, too, FWIW.
For the record, I'm pretty sure they've recently decided to stop doing this, per this message� from Larry McVoy. Note the third paragraph regarding "future directions." It sounds like they'll play nice alongside Cygwin, but not be built on top of it. The last time I tried to install BitKeeper (around October 2003), it trashed my Cygwin mounts even though I told the installer not to touch my Cygwin setup, and even then BitKeeper wouldn't run without crashing. Apparently it wasn't (re)built to handle Cygwin 1.5.x. Sadly, as a result, I've been without BitKeeper on my new computer. Footnotes: � http://www.bitmover.com/pipermail/bitkeeper-users/2003-October/001025.html -- Steven E. Harris -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
