On Mon, 17 May 2010, DRC wrote:
We are not talking about taking over maintainership from the MinGW
folks; just provide the necessary fixes to make the build easier. This
can be in the form of documentation and/or updated packages. Likely, we
could perhaps also get help from the MinGW folks with
Paul Donohue wrote:
> He's essentially looking for the ability to encapsulate packets from another
> network connection in an RFB message, which doesn't really have anything to
> do with encryption (I think the only reason ssh was mentioned is because ssh
> just happens to have the ability to en
>> As far as code compatibility, let's start with the fact that MinGW is
>> constantly behind the curve on the Windows API and always will be.
>
> Yes, but it's quite easy to add missing libraries and headers, when
> necessary.
Quite easy? No, far from it. Witness how long it has taken to resol
On 6/1/10 6:52 AM, Thomas Sondergaard wrote:
> Why does it have to be horribly ugly and inefficient? Do you also
> consider the port-forwarding mechanism in ssh to be a horrible ugly
> hack? Other than the large framebuffer update messages causing latency
> problems for other traffic, I don't se
