Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/08/30/17:04:38
Jonathon Merz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Does anyone know how we can adapt the archives so that they are not
>>> WinZip
>>> readable? Would just converting everything to .bz2 do that?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems like it. WinZip 8.0 won't read a cron-3.0.1-4.tar.bz2 file I have.
>>
> <soapbox>
</me chops your soapbox up for firewood>
> Just some comments: I do fully support the use of bzip2 over gzip
> because it compresses better, but I think using it purely to thwart
> WinZip users would be a bad reason to do so.
Really? when (a) using WinZip results in a BROKEN installation, (b)
users who say "I installed cygwin using WinZip" on this mailing list are
immediately told -- "reinstall using setup.exe" (because winzip-created
cygwin "installations" are irretrievably BROKEN), and (c) because it's
technically POSSIBLE right now to "install" cygwin using WinZip, we get
newbies who ignore the HUGE @#$(& link on the cygwin webpage for the
setup program and use WinZip to "install" at least once a week --
You think we're out of line for trying to make it hard for *new users*
to shoot themselves in the foot?
> Deliberate limitations
> compatibility for the sake of limiting compatibility is something that
> many people dislike about Microsoft, and I don't see that it improves
> anything, ever.
But WinZip is ALREADY "incompatible" -- while you can "unzip" the
.tar.gz files and get something that LOOKS like a cygwin installation --
it isn't. Isn't an obvious, upfront refusal to allow this better than
enabling users to "install" a broken system by using the WRONG tool?
> On the other hand, if there is a legitimate reason to
> do something, and limiting compatibility is a side effect, then so be
> it.
DING DING DING! We have a winner!
> Likewise, while we all appreciate the efficiency of command-line
> tools, trying to thwart users of WinZip is kind of elitist, and for
> those who have gotten to be called "System Administrators" without
> learning much in the way of command line tools, our efforts would be
> better spent teaching them to patch their IIS servers before we try to
> teach them to use the command line :)
Irrelevant. Setup.exe is already a GUI tool -- despite continual
requests by "elitists" to add commandline/batch capability. These
"elitists" are not 31337 enough to do add/contribute the necessary
capabilities themselves, so it hasn't been done. So much for "elitism".
--Chuck
--
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 -