On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:35:20PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:05:44PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: >>On 21/08/2009 03:44, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>>Erm... sorry, but why would you want to do this? Either you have a >>>1.5 based installation running a 1.5 perl, or you have a 1.7 based >>>installation running a 1.7 perl. If you have two independent Cygwin >>>trees, one 1.5 and one 1.7, then there won't be any collision either. >>>I really don't understand what that's good for. >> >>A lot of unnecessary work on my end, perhaps? I'm with you on this >>one; please do NOT do this. > >Ditto. I thought we'd already gone down this path and decided not to >make tests based on the cygwin version number. Presumably configure >should be smart enough and fine-grained enough to make the required >decisions without this.
Sorry. I pullled in configure here when it didn't make a lot of sense but I really don't like the notion of using the cygwin version number in any type of configuration. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
