Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-15 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 15 10:27, Wes S wrote: > Will this have any impact on having a version of screen that works? I have no idea, not using screen at all. You could test it, of course. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygw

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-15 Thread Wes S
Will this have any impact on having a version of screen that works? Thanks, Wes -- 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/

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-15 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 14 18:08, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Brian Ford wrote: > >On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > >>Ok, but then, is the problem that the auth dll *is* cygwin1.dll, or else > >>why wouldn't the reboot only be needed when you update the auth dll? > >>(Does the auth dll need cygwin1.dll or

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Brian Ford wrote: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Ok, but then, is the problem that the auth dll *is* cygwin1.dll, or else why wouldn't the reboot only be needed when you update the auth dll? (Does the auth dll need cygwin1.dll or would it be possible to make it only the other way ar

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Brian Ford
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Ok, but then, is the problem that the auth dll *is* cygwin1.dll, or else > why wouldn't the reboot only be needed when you update the auth dll? > (Does the auth dll need cygwin1.dll or would it be possible to make it > only the other way around? Maybe

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Feb 14 13:11, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Corinna Vinschen wrote: [snip] And in the long run you will have to reboot your machine each time you install a new Cygwin release when using this feature. That's a fairly major bummer. Is that because this is something that depen

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 14 13:11, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Feb 14 10:22, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > >>Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>>Exciting new stuff so far (IMHO): > >>>[snip] > >>>- New setuid method which allows to logon without password and being > >>> recognized correctly also by na

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Corinna Vinschen wrote: On Feb 14 10:22, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Corinna Vinschen wrote: Exciting new stuff so far (IMHO): [snip] - New setuid method which allows to logon without password and being recognized correctly also by native Windows applications Does this mean ssh might *finally* wor

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 14 10:22, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >Exciting new stuff so far (IMHO): > >[snip] > >- New setuid method which allows to logon without password and being > > recognized correctly also by native Windows applications > > Does this mean ssh might *finally* work right w

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Matthew Woehlke
Corinna Vinschen wrote: Exciting new stuff so far (IMHO): [snip] - New setuid method which allows to logon without password and being recognized correctly also by native Windows applications Does this mean ssh might *finally* work right with password-less login? :-) -- Matthew -- Unsubscr

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 14 03:17, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Feb 13 21:02, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote: > >> And approximately what is the timeframe to 1.7.0; weeks, months, next > >> year? Is HEAD stable enough for those not working on cygwin1.dll to be > >> testing? > > > > M

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 13 21:02, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote: >> And approximately what is the timeframe to 1.7.0; weeks, months, next >> year? Is HEAD stable enough for those not working on cygwin1.dll to be >> testing? > > Months. It's stable enough now but it's constantly changing.

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Eric Lilja
Corinna Vinschen skrev: On Feb 13 21:02, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote: Christopher Faylor wrote: So, barring any catastrophic problems with the current released version of the Cygwin DLL, the last Cygwin version with support for non-Windows-NT class versions of Windows will be 1.5.24-2. And app

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-14 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 13 21:02, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote: > Christopher Faylor wrote: > > So, barring any catastrophic problems with the current released version > > of the Cygwin DLL, the last Cygwin version with support for > > non-Windows-NT class versions of Windows will be 1.5.24-2. > > And approximately

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-13 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin Ports)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Christopher Faylor wrote: > So, barring any catastrophic problems with the current released version > of the Cygwin DLL, the last Cygwin version with support for > non-Windows-NT class versions of Windows will be 1.5.24-2. And approximately what is

[ANNOUNCEMENT] EOL for Windows 95/86/Me

2007-02-12 Thread Christopher Faylor
I'm not sure if it has reached the consciousness of the general Cygwin user base yet but I wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of the fact that we will be ripping out support for Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows Me in the next version of Cygwin, which will be version 1.7.0. This has bee