On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 04:55:45PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > The Cygwin stuff in installation.sgml also mentions NT, 2000, XP, but > it's not clear from the phrasing if it meant "and later" or "and > earlier", so I'm not sure if it needs adjusting or removing...
Right. We could just remove the entire mention to "NT, 2000 or XP" instead? There would be no loss in clarity IMO. > I think we can drop mention of Itanium (RIP): the ancient versions of > Windows that could run on that arch are desupported with your patch. > It might be more relevant to say that we can't yet run on ARM, and > Windows 11 is untested by us, but let's fix those problems instead of > documenting them :-) Okay to remove the Itanium part for me. > Is the mention of "64-Bit" in that title sounds a little anachronistic > to me (isn't that the norm now?) but I'm not sure what to suggest. Not sure. I think that I would leave this part alone for now. > There are more mentions of older Windows releases near the compiler > stuff but perhaps your MSVC version vacuuming work will take care of > those. Yes, I have a few changes like the one in main.c for _M_AMD64. Are you referring to something else? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
