Question about XP support

[Corinna Vinschen]

On May 25 10:22, Erik Soderquist wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >
> > On 25 May 2016 at 06:07, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > Uh oh, bad timing...
> > >
> > > The next release 2.5.2 introduces the first non-XP compatible code.
> > > It's in a seldom used corner of the code and it doesn't require
> > > functions unavailable on XP, so it will very likely not break 99% of the
> > > existing applications yet.
> > >
> > > But the next release after will very likely break XP support entirely.
> >
> > Would this be something to move to 3.x because there seems to be a lot
> > of people who come onto the list a lot. That way they know they can
> > use 2.5.1 and that is the last 'stable' release they need to 'fork'
> > from as say Cygnus-XP1 to keep going?
> 
> I like this idea.  I too have some isolated XP VM stations (mine
> deliberately have zero network connection; "defender updates" do NOT
> close security holes) that I currently plan to continue using until
> I've learned enough programming myself to rewrite the windows only
> utilities I have running in these stations.  A version change from
> from 2.x to 3.x at the official end of XP support would make it a very
> clean marker.

2.6, probably.  This is much more than you got back in the days when
we dropped support for 9x, NT4, W2K ;)


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20160526/60cce6a9/attachment.sig>