ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/03/30/13:52:55

Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:40:48 -0800
From: Enoch Wu <ewu AT eskimo DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: for interest: cygwin rpm on sourceforge
Message-ID: <20010330104048.A4136047@MELON>
Reply-To: Enoch Wu <ewu AT eskimo DOT com>
Mail-Followup-To: Enoch Wu <ewu AT eskimo DOT com>, cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
References: <E94FF01DFF6CD31186F4080009DC361501C781BF AT nttwr2 DOT tower DOT bldgs DOT butlermfg DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <E94FF01DFF6CD31186F4080009DC361501C781BF@nttwr2.tower.bldgs.butlermfg.org>; from rdparker@butlermfg.com on Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:20:45AM -0600
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.2.5i <http://www.mutt.org>
X-Operating-System: CYGWIN_98-4.10 1.1.8(0.34/3/2) i586<http://www.cygwin.com>
X-Sender: ewu AT eskimo DOT com

On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 11:20:45AM -0600, Parker, Ron wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu]
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > This whole deal smacks of pure stubborn-ness.  "I don't like the
> > official installation method (even though it was the subject of months
> > of debate) so I'm gonna muddy the waters with an rpm distro"  "Even
> > though I'm maintaining an rpm of bind for cygwin, I will not 
> > contribute
> > a binary .tar.gz so that users of the official installation method can
> > benefit..."
> 
> I just hope it doesn't degrade into the GNU-emacs vs. XEmacs frackas, where
> there are actually two very good and very similar packages with one freely
> using code from the other, but donating none back to the original.  (This is
> not a commentary on XEmacs, I actually use both.)
>

I know that you know what the real world is like. Let me reiterate:
It is not possible to stop developers from developing their own
distributions. Another example is Linux, with so many not so compatible 
distributions. I believe that most developers believe that their way is
the best way. What is in the mind of the Cygwin RPM developers I cannot 
tell.

There is one thing that can be done. The cygwin website can warn others 
of possible problems in installing unofficial Cygwin binaries from 
elsewhere.

Thanks for reading.
EW 

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019