Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID:	<38B6CB5A.8AA07C0D@sigma6.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:35:06 -0500
From:	Jeff Sturm <jsturm AT sigma6 DOT com>
Organization:	AppNet
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Cygnus - Admin <cygnus AT ncohafmuta DOT com>
CC:	cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject:	Re: stupid question??
References:	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 10002250958550 DOT 23773-100000 AT clipons DOT ncohafmuta DOT com>

Cygnus - Admin wrote:
> 
> Ok, I have to take issue with something here. For a few weeks now I've
> been skimming the posts about all these ports to cygwin
> with NT/95/98/whatever..inetd, etc, etc..
> And my question is, WHY? If you want all these unix programs, why not just
> use unix?

Everybody has their own reasons, as I am sure you are discovering.

Ours are twofold: I need a build environment on NT that understands our
bash scripts, makefiles, etc.  While I can cross-compile everything,
sometimes it's just nice to build/debug/run on one host.

We also rely on Cygwin for remote administration.  We manage several NT
servers that are physically remote to us.  NT has dismal remote
administration tools (i.e., none), so Cygwin/inetd/telnetd has saved our
butts many times over.

--
Jeff Sturm
jsturm AT sigma6 DOT com

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -