Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:36:01 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: setup package format v. rpm, reasoning?
Message-ID:	<20050216013601.GA18715@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<4212958D DOT 8050302 AT tlinx DOT org>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4212958D.8050302@tlinx.org>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.4.1i

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 04:36:29PM -0800, Linda W wrote:
>I can imagine during the early development of cygwin, the rpm
>package types were rather "unsupportable" -- especially on a
>"first install", since no unix shell or coreutils are available.
>
>However, after the basic support is installed, what was the reasoning
>for keeping packages in YAPM (YetAnotherPackageManager).
>
>It seems even a bit more surprising considering Cygwin's early
>roots coming from a RedHat...

Cygwin's early roots did not come from Red Hat.  They came from
Cygnus.  That's what the "Cyg" stands for.

cgf

--
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/

- Raw text -