On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 07:42:40PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: >Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote: >>Thank goodness someone has found the Cygwin release that's a panacea >>for all subsequent Cygwin ills! I'd heard B20 touted as this for so >>long that I was afraid Cygwin would never reach such heights again. >>Boy am I relieved! I guess there's no need for further Cygwin releases, >>since 1.3.9 is now the cure all (actually, this makes me wonder why >>there were any releases after B20....) Anybody have any idea what would >>be a good use of the newly freed >> >>up time of members of this group? > > >LOL!
Ditto. >Although, the XEmacs-centric crowd has been recommending "stay at >1.3.2" for some time, now. So unfortunately, 1.3.9 is NOT a complete >panacea. We *may* actually have to keep developing cygwin...mebbe >1.3.11 will be all the juicy goodness of 1.3.2 + 1.3.9, and then we can >stop? Yes. I've heard that. They broke something in Xemacs so that it stopped working with 1.3.3+. I think it's ttys or maybe processes or something. There is definitely some kind of problem there that one of the developers should check into. I'd do it but I don't get paid to work on Xemacs! I hope this helps someone track down the problem, at least. Unfortunately I have no more time to help and I only know how to program cygwin, myself, anyway. cgf -- 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/