From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: E To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Did some porting for cygwin Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:48:00 -0000 Message-id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010723083425.00a7aa50@192.168.1.1> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010722165317.00a07610@bastion.datatask.com.au> <3B5B0109.70600@ece.gatech.edu> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01259.html At 12:36 PM 22/07/2001 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >The cygwin-xfree people get justifiably upset when a "fork" like this >happens (and make no mistake, what you're proposing is a fork -- or will >become one once the inevitable version-skew happens). I think the mistake is on your part. I am not proposing a fork. I am suggesting that the freetype package be contributed by cygwin-xfree into the base set of packages for cygwin. If the answer to that is "it will happen soon, just wait a bit" then that's fine. You could have said that without the condescendence(tm). >Besides, freetype is useless without the X libraries, anyway. Well, judging from the original email, it is at least useful for PHP, which is not X based to my knowledge. I know I've used it in another application that was not X based. So I guess it is not totally useless with the X libraries, anyway. E. -- 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/