This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: EOL for Windows 95/98/Me
On Feb 7 10:45, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 07 February 2007 10:18, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Btw., it just occured to me that I'd rather get rid of the 9x stuff in
> > the 1.7.0 DLL entirely. This would have visible advantages.
> >
> > - The code size of the DLL would shrink by a good amount.
> >
> > - The autoloading of functions could be reduced to the functions not
> > available on all NT versions. This would reduce the autoload overhead
> > by about 90%.
> >
> > - The code complexity would be reduced enormously by stripping off at
> > least 50% of the `if (wincap.foo ()) tests. This would also have
> > some positive effects on the performance.
> >
> > - Long 32K pathname support doesn't exist in 9x. So, when we switch
> > over to using the unicode functions for pathnames, we would have a
> > lot of avoidable hassle to keep 9x running at all.
> >
> > You're all convinced, right?
>
> Hell yeah! Let's have a mass-delete-fest!
>
> We should tag the repository beforehand, just in case some retro-enthusiasts
> feel like keeping 1.5.x alive on a branch and keeping it hobbling along on '9x
> for a while longer.
We have a branch for 1.5.x already for >9 months. Guess where the
recent 1.5.x releases came from? ;)
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat