From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13527 invoked by alias); 11 Jan 2016 19:59:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 13511 invoked by uid 89); 11 Jan 2016 19:59:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:CACoZoo, H*i:sk:CACoZoo, soderquist, Soderquist X-HELO: mail-ig0-f169.google.com Received: from mail-ig0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-ig0-f169.google.com) (209.85.213.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 19:59:47 +0000 Received: by mail-ig0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h5so77883365igh.0 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:59:47 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.50.40.8 with SMTP id t8mr14166879igk.26.1452542385890; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:59:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.9] (d27-96-48-76.nap.wideopenwest.com. [96.27.76.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 81sm7140884iod.31.2016.01.11.11.59.45 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:59:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Windows XP Support To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <56924AB1.1070903@gmx.de> <5692DBF5.3040100@comcast.net> <5692EEA8.4000703@gmail.com> From: cyg Simple X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <569409B4.3040501@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 21:31:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg00126.txt.bz2 On 1/11/2016 12:05 PM, Erik Soderquist wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Juan Miguel Navarro Martínez wrote: >> No software version can live forever, ... > > Personally, I have to disagree with this statement, or at least offer > an amendment... > > I have some things still running in DOS 5 in a virtual machine because > that is the most effective environment to run them in, and I don't > expect any future OS to change that. Does this mean I have these > accessible to the outside world? Absolutely not. So while I do see > use cases for very long outdated packages, I will also agree these use > cases are not mainstream by any means, and if your use case does > warrant an old package, appropriate measures to isolate the old > packages also need to be taken. > Arguments like this is the reason I had to spend years searching through COBOL code for 2 digit years. Old habits seem hard to die. Either upgrade or forever pay the penalty yourself to keep the old code running. -- cyg Simple -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple