Subject: Re: multiple cygwin installs
From: Christopher Faylor <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:21:37 -0400
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>

On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:11:40PM +0200, J?rg Schaible wrote:
>Phil Betts wrote on Thursday, March 29, 2007 1:34 PM:
>> <soapbox>
>>Any 3PP that forces one to use their (inevitably out of date) version
>>of cygwin (and thereby killing the official installation) is IMO broken
>>and the issue should be taken up with them.  At the very least, it
>>shows they have such little faith in their own software's robustness
>>that they won't risk it running on an newer version of cygwin.
>>
>>Imagine the chaos if ALL software was installed like this.  You might
>>end up with 100 different versions of cygwin on your PC, and ProductA
>>would never be able to talk to ProductB because they'd need two
>>different sets of registry settings simultaneously.
>>
>>I'm sure their justification is that they are reducing support costs by
>>ensuring it's running on a known platform.  Only if their customer
>>support is forced to resolve the problems caused by their installation
>>will they learn that this is a false economy.
>></soapbox>
>
>Well, the soapbox is coming true.  Or why do you think so much
>companies start to deliver their app in a VM?  Never trust an OS
>installed by a stranger ...  hehehe

This is probably cygwin-talk material (Reply-To set) but is that really
true?  Are companies really packaging products with their own VM?

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/