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:	<03F4742D8225D21191EF00805FE62B9908E23EF8@aa-msg-01.medstat.com>
From:	John Wiersba <John DOT Wiersba AT medstat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	RE: libc-documentation
Date:	Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:48:14 -0400
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	29 Jun 2001 18:47:46.0368 (UTC) FILETIME=[FCDB5C00:01C100CB]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robinow, David [mailto:drobinow AT dayton DOT adroit DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 3:57 PM
> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: RE: libc-documentation
> 
> 
> > From: GoetzKA AT t-online DOT de [mailto:GoetzKA AT t-online DOT de]
> > Subject: Re: libc-documentation
>  
> > Is there anyone who really knows what the current
> > documenting state is, and where to get the docu existing so far?
>  I think I do.  At least to my satisfaction.
> > 
> > It's fairly hard to believe that e.g. a lot of apparently
> > useful libs (such as libregex) are distributed without 
> > ANY docu, making them useless therefore.
> > So I conclude that at least part of it exists -- somewhere...
>
>  Not all documentation is included with the binaries.  
> Download the source
> code.  It's a judgment call as to how much documentation is 
> included with
> the binaries.  The distribution is already quite large.

It's probably been discussed before, but it would be great if someday cygwin
really was a complete GNU/linux hosted under Windows.  "Complete" in this
case meaning all the docs that you would get with a linux install of the
same packages.  Maybe the development docs (e.g. libc) could be packaged
separately.  I know there are, and will be for a long time, differences
between what you can do on linux and on cygwin, but that's what cygwin is
about -- minimizing those differences (at least in my mind).  In any case
that's how I think of cygwin -- a more or less complete unix emulator, not
just a porting layer.

-- John Wiersba

--
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/

- Raw text -