From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2008-09-08 11:43:20
|
Quoting Chris Sutcliffe <ir0...@gm...>: >>> It seems like mingwrt is the new preferred name for the runtime. That >>> being the case I'm going to follow up on the cygwin list to see how >>> they want to handle things. >> >> Yes, mingwrt is the winner. > > I've followed up on the cygwin-apps list and they want to maintain the > status quo regarding file naming convention, so I've made the > necessary changes to the Makefile.in for both packages such that the > MinGW packages use the new naming standard and the Cygwin packages use > the old naming standard. > You must have stated it as if there was an optional choice. I would have stated it as; this is going to happen. The Cygwin specifics are embedded in the archive itself, not the name of the file. It wouldn't be the first time Cygwin changed the name of a package. Earnie |