Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2001/09/16/05:16:43
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > >Out of curiosity, are you testing on Win95 950, 950a, or 950b? I remember
> > >when I did QA, some API calls that did not work as documented on 950/950a
> > >would work fine on 950b. If you can't find 950b specifically, testing on
> > >win98 is almost equivelant (950b has the win98 "kernel", for the
> > >mostpart).
> >
> > It doesn't really matter. If it doesn't work on one system, it isn't
> > useful.
>
> IMO, it does matter. We have the same problem of non-interuptible IO
> on sockets. It's solved in net.cc by using the `CancelIO' call which
> doesn't exist in 95.
>
> My humbly opinion: 95 is really, really old now. It has been
> substituted by two following OSes in the meantime and the third
> is coming soon. Even Microsoft has canceled support for 95 and
> I can understand them. If 95 doesn't work in a specific part of
> Cygwin which works fine in 98/ME/NT/W2K/XP, we shouldn't care
> anymore. We just stop to create workarounds which are really only
> for 95.
I agree, especially since it's now been deprecated by Microsoft itself. I
didn't argue further because I assumed there is a business case for
continuing win95 support. Is there?
--
http://www.clock.org/~matt
- Raw text -