Re: Article about cygwin on UnixReview.com

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 01:38:56PM -0800, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>*** Corinna Vinschen (corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com) wrote today:
>
>CV> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 04:17:06PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>CV> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:49:39AM -0800, Joshua Daniel Franklin
>CV> > wrote:
>CV> > >Gagn? reviews Cygwin 1.3.20:
>CV> > >
>CV> > ><http://www.unixreview.com/documents/s=7822/sam0302web/>
>CV> >
>CV> > Huh.  Interesting.  Someone else has been casting around inside of
>CV> > Red Hat looking for someone to interview about Cygwin, too.  Oddly
>CV> > enough, I wasn't the obvious choice for some reason.
>CV> >
>CV> > Too bad that this guy didn't just download links, lynx, or wget.
>CV> > It would have saved him some time.
>CV>
>CV> Yeah, we should probably ask him.
>
>Although I agree with this sentiment, I also feel that part of his point
>was to make it very clear that cygwin is some type of Linux or Unix, and
>everyone who knows how to build a package in Linux or Unix can do the same
>in Cygwin, and I believe that this point is very important for many
>people, so I wouldn't correct him that much.

Um, I don't think that Corinna was suggesting that anyone should flame
him.  The only correction I can think of is "lynx and wget are already
available under cygwin."

However, if your premise is correct, then one would expect that lynx and
wget might already exist in a linux distribution.  Sure, it's nice to
demonstrate that it is easy to build a new package under cygwin but
implying that the distribution lacks simple things like wget or lynx
isn't doing anyone any favors.  If you want to build something build
something that isn't already in the distribution.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/