Re: GPL Violation

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 02:06:09PM -0500, Robb, Sam wrote:
>So, why not offer versions of the dll that you *know* will not conflict
>with an existing cygwin installation, or with other instances of the
>stand-alone version of the cygwin dll?

Because there is no such beast.  You can get some isolation relatively
easily but you can't get perfect interoperability between two different
versions of cygwin without quite a bit more work.  I'm not interested in
doing the work and I'm not interested in seeing the bugs that will
result if the "two cygwins on one system" becomes common.

That plus I haven't seen any rationale for keeping two cygwins on the
system other than "because I gotta".

The newest version of the Cygwin DLL is supposed to just work with older
binaries.  In 99% of the cases it does just work and usually it works
better.  If this was a business and I had a customer base, the 1% might
bother me.  This is not a business, I'm not being paid to care, and the
1% doesn't bother me overly much.  I will continue fix bugs as I hear of
them (assuming they are presented in a way that I can duplicate the bug)
so that if a program works with cygwin 1.3.12 and breaks with 1.3.20, it
should work again in 1.3.21.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/