On Oct 15 12:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Oct 15 02:18, Larry Hall (Cygwin Developers) wrote:
> really more
> concerned about any others that I most certainly haven't even dreamed
> of. Has
> anyone started enumerating a list of "possible problems" that
we may see
> popping up on the list if we allow multiple, disjoint Cygwin
> environments in the
> wild? Should we be trying to think of the potential problem areas so
> that we
> can assure ourselves that we have a good chance of being able
to classify
> them and offer responses and solutions (or policies) for them?
And then there's this: How many problems has been reported where
there's no "multiple Cygwin" message, and only the cygcheck output
revealed that there are multiple Cygwin DLLs in $PATH? With the patch,
you're trading situations like that with situations in which no problem
occurs just because there's no collision. In my eyes that's a win.
Especially with your registry idea added to it.