Xterm, rxvt, mrxvt, etc....
Sun May 6 16:58:00 GMT 2007
* Thomas Dickey (Sun, 6 May 2007 10:49:23 -0400 (EDT))
> On Sun, 6 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > Thomas Dickey wrote:
> >> On Sat, 5 May 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >>> The fact is, rxvt upstream is dead, dead, dead. It has shuffled off this
> >>> mortal coil. Joined the choir invisible. It is an EX-terminal. The
> >>> terminal is terminal.
> >> thanks for agreeing with me. It has no maintainer.
> > Not so fast, Thomas. I did not and do not agree with your previous posts:
> > neither of your messages claimed that "upstream rxvt has no maintainer". (If
> > they did, then I would have agreed with that.) Your messages claimed that
> > rxvt had no cygwin maintainer. That claim is false: I am the cygwin
> > maintainer for rxvt.
> I don't much care for the role of "cygwin maintainer" in a discussion
> related to _support_ [...]
You are confusing things. Quoting you: '"support" is relative. There's
apparently no X maintainer [...]'. If you don't 'care for the role of
"cygwin maintainer"' then that's obviously nonsense as X is maintained
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin-xfree