This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Is the Cygwin installation process likely to change significantly anytime soon?


At 10:21 PM 8/2/2005, Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>

<snip>

>Here's what I've written so far; I'd like to know if there are any errors and how it might be improved. I discuss Cygwin in two places, which I've labelled "Installing Cygwin" and "Discussion of Cygwin and MinGW."
>
>Best Regards,
>Jonathan Turkanis
>
>**** Installing Cygwin ****
>

<snip>


>If you are short on disk space, or if you have a slow internet connection, you can choose a smaller collection of packages. To select all of the development tools, click once on the word Default next to the word Devel. Wait for the word Default to change to Install, then  press Finish. For an even smaller collection of packages, expand the list of development packages by clicking on the + icon next to the word Devel. Select the packages gcc-core, gcc-g++, and make by clicking on the word Skip, opposite each package, causing it to change to Install, and by checking the box under the column labeled Bin? Now press Finish.


Checking the "Bin?" box should not be necessary.  It should be checked by
default.  


<snip>


>**** Discussion of Cygwin and MinGW ****

<snip>

>MinGW, which stands for "Minimalist GNU for Windows," is an attempt to provide a minimal environment for porting GNU applications to Windows. While the full Cygwin installation occupies several Gigabytes, the MinGW distribution is relatively small. 


My only comment here is that Cygwin's default installation is also rather
small.  I actually haven't compared the MSYS installation with a Cygwin
one, utility for utility, package for package, but I would guess that if
one were to do so, the sizes would not be that different (though maybe you 
have already done this and know that there is some substantial difference.)
My only reservation about your MinGW vs Cygwin comparison is that it may
give a false impression to potential users that if they want a small 
installation with lots of tools, choose MinGW but if they want a large 
installation with even more tools, choose Cygwin.  I've always viewed 
the difference between MinGW and Cygwin as one of direct Windows ports
vs POSIX/Unix/Linux portability.  MSYS muddies the water a little with it's
suite of POSIX-like tools for building but it only muddies things because
it's a fork of Cygwin to start with.



--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746                     


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]