Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<000901c0d415$9c3562c0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	"Warren Young" <warren AT etr-usa DOT com>, "egor duda" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 2 DOT 20010501102110 DOT 02e99390 AT san-francisco DOT beasys DOT com> <17105307514 DOT 20010501224113 AT logos-m DOT ru> <3AF1515B DOT 42137DE5 AT etr-usa DOT com>
Subject:	Re: When will cygwin ever be stable?
Date:	Thu, 3 May 2001 23:40:45 +1000
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	03 May 2001 21:06:09.0963 (UTC) FILETIME=[E0A3A7B0:01C0D414]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Young" <warren AT etr-usa DOT com>
To: "egor duda" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:38 PM
Subject: Re: When will cygwin ever be stable?


> egor duda wrote:
> >
> > i wholeheartedly agree that lots of cygwin users will benefit from
> > rock-stable cygwin. the main question is "what cygwin team should do
> > for this?"
>
> To answer this it might be helpful to know where Cygwin is going.  I

http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq_1.html#SEC1

Anything that expands the quality (speed/security/flexability/API's
supported) of the cygwin library. That's it. All the software you get is
incidental to cygwin itself. If you mean Cygwin the volunteer run
distribution of open source software linked to the cygwin library, well
I think the closest model we've got for comparison is debian. (In that
the _distribution_ itself is not a business for anyone. ) And at the
moment everyone who's contributing is either being altruistic because
noone else was willing, and they didn't want to see cygwin suffer, or
they are scratching their own itch and helping out because it's trivial
for them (ie Squid and I).

> assume that the overall goal is stepwise refinement towards Linuxness
or
> similar.  So, how far are we from that goal?

Well thats a hard question. linuxness and similar are all moving
targets. How long is a piece of string?

Name a piece of software that runs on linux. If it doesn't run on
cygwin, then document the missing or broken cygwin functions and you can
then point to something thats in the "gap between here and the goal".

Rob


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -