This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: WinXP is dead [WAS: 2.6.x: broken compatibility with Wine],
- From: Andrey Gursky <andrey dot gursky at e-mail dot ua>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Cc: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 15:19:59 +0100
- Subject: Re: WinXP is dead [WAS: 2.6.x: broken compatibility with Wine],
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
> On Nov 10 04:21, Andrey Gursky wrote:
> > Hi cyg Simple,
> > On 11/9/2016 7:59 AM, Andrey Gursky wrote:
> > > >
> > > > P.S. Was it not too early to remove WinXP support? Though it is
> > > > officially not supported anymore, there are still PCs running WinXP
> > > > (and Wine). Also there are still systems, I've heard, using some
> > > > embedded Windows, that shares the same code with WinXP, thus making it
> > > > not yet truly obsolete. Additionally a lot of work has been done by
> > > > Cygwin contributors to support this OS and I believe the most of bugs
> > > > have been workarounded, while due to stopped development it is not
> > > > likely one has to spend time solving new problems. So was it really
> > > > worth to drop the hardly crafted code? Are there already some
> > > > worthwhile advantages? Why wasn't it possible to switch Cygwin WinXP
> > > > support to just "not officially supported"? (kindly asking)
> > >
> > > This has been answered. The problem with supporting XP into infinitude
> > > is that every application would need to agree to do the same.
> > > Improvements to the OS API would not be able to be used so there are
> > > trade-offs for the continued support of an OS that is no longer
> > > supported. The code becomes unwieldy to maintain because a change needs
> > > to be tested on other systems. Security maintenance becomes impossible
> > > because the OS vendor no longer supports the older OS. There is the
> > > cygwin time machine, USE IT if you need old software for old OS.
> > Thanks for your reply (however I haven't received it, because you
> > likely didn't click on "reply all"?).
> > Do you refer to the recent message ?
> > Regarding cygwin time machine. I can't use it, since cygwin is compiled
> > for MSYS2. And then it is being run under Wine on GNU/Linux. While
> > WinXP is still not dead, Wine is definitively not an old OS. It's just
> > an active project doing WinAPI implementation from scratch according to
> > documentation. Thus I hope Cygwin developers could talk directly to
> > Wine ones to find the minimum needed changes in both projects.
> Ending XP support was announced last year and only a year later we
> actually dropped it. So we don't support Windows XP anymore, but we
> *would* support Wine. However, the problem here is not on the Cygwin
> It seems Cygwin under Wine was not tested outside of XP compatibility
> mode, or Wine doesn't support certain post-XP functions albeit claiming
> Vista caompatibility. Cygwin doesn't require any functionality which
> isn't available in Vista.
sorry, I missed that early announce. Is there any link? Since I'm aware
only of almost "last minute" MSYS2 mail  referring to your recent
If I understood you correctly, previously discussed changes in Cygwin
itself are not considered anymore and from now Wine is really left
alone with this issue?
 Announcement: msys2-runtime 2.5.1 -- last version to support XP/2003
30. June 2016
P.S. I didn't receive your message also. Does Cygwin mailing list
program strips my E-Mail address (though I see it in the archive)?
(And it even can't guess a possibly follow-up :( )
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple