FLTK versions in Cygwin [was: Re: units: update, FHS compliance]

Mon Jan 25 19:54:00 GMT 2010

On 25/01/2010 04:57, Albrecht Schlosser wrote:
> Point taken. But unfortunately the FLTK community decided it the
> other way with a majority of 74% (this must have been in or before
> 2003):
>> http://www.fltk.org/poll.php?r1
>> Thus this is not likely to be changed. Sorry.

Since when are matters such as this decided by opinion polls? I bet 
most of the voters didn't use Cygwin or even know what it is. Did you 
have a poll to decide how FLTK should be built on Linux? Didn't think 
so. I am NOT impressed.
Like any other platform, the only people that should have a say in any 
package's behaviour on Cygwin are the Cygwin managers and maintainers. 
We have made Cygwin a *NIX/X11 platform, and we have decided that gcc 
will not support -mno-cygwin (which was broken anyway). *That* is the 
ONLY opinion that should matter in this discussion.
Unfortunately this attitude is by no means limited to FLTK, and any 
frustration with this topic is based more on the frequency of this sort 
of thinking than with FLTK in particular.
Yaakov
--
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