Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/03/30/19:27:35
I know author of that site, so I thought I would answer for him since he is
not on mailing list.
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > I just noticed that they are doing 1500 downloads a week... not bad. I
> > take this to mean that the cygwinuser base is growing at greater than
> > ~1500/packagecount per week.
> Actually, this is terrible.
> 1. Folks using cygwinrpm are installing cygwin stuff *without* using the
> officially approved setup.exe utility. Yet, you can be guaranteed that
> they will come to *us* asking for help when it breaks, overwrites the
> "official" port of a given package, etc.
> 2. Many of the packages on cygwinrpm are duplicates (or OLD versions) of
> packages that are now part of the official cygwin tree. This includes:
> perl, zip, unzip, cpio, readline, automake, ncftp, wget. Q: "I have
> readline installed. It's broken" A: Is it the official readline, or did
> you get it somewhere else?" How often do we ask on the list if someone
> is using the official setup.exe-installed version of a standard package
> -- or do we just *assume* they're using the official version?
It is simply a mater of the site been out of date, usually files get removed
when official versions are released. I will try and contact author to get it
updated again, he doesn't have as much free time anymore. Check out main
page at http://cygwin-rpm.sourceforge.net/ to see.
> 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
The bind port is just a recompile/update of one at
Most files on site had tarball available along with rpm version, most of
the other files were in the process of having tarballs added too I think.
- Raw text -