Avoid collisions between parallel installations of Cygwin

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Tue Oct 13 15:44:00 GMT 2009

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:22:05AM -0500, Brian Ford wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> The policy of "always use the newest" still makes sense to me.
>Disclaimer: We are not the Red Hat customer who payed for this feature.
>This policy only makes sense in an ideal world where complete backward
>compatibility is guaranteed by the development team, and where any new bugs
>introduced are rapidly fixed.  I submit to you that this is not the case
>in reality from our own experience from 1.5.18 through 1.7, and is a
>nearly impossible goal, especially for a volunteer open source software
>For example, I'm aware of few times where our original application built
>and working under 1.5.18 did not have a significant issue with newer
>versions; many of which were complete show stoppers.  Some of these issues
>were due to policy changes that decided it was ok to break previous
>behavior because is was deemed to never have been "officially supported".
>Some were due to "bug fixes" that changed behavior to make it more like
>Linux, others were due to bug fixes that significantly effected
>performance, and still others were due to introducing new bugs when new
>features were added.  If anyone really wants the complete chronological
>list, I can provide it, but I don't think the details are where the point

Of *course* we want details.  It is funny that you chose this particular
discussion to make this point, however.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list