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: <3B3915D0.8000402@dufair.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:08:00 -0500
From: Jason Dufair <jase AT dufair DOT org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010607
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: two problems with cygwin's zip
References: <3B390298 DOT 6030301 AT gruntose DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Fred T. Hamster wrote:

>    1) if it really is not a goal to properly handle native filename 
> paths within cygwin, then this severely limits its appeal for those 
> already familiar with cygwin's single target platform (win32).  in my 
> opinion, one cannot simultaneously disdain the win32 path conventions 
> and yet also promote a product that is intended exclusively for win32 
> without resorting to some form of schizophrenia.

I think it's unfair to blame "cygwin" for this "issue."  zip != cygwin. 
 Cygwin *does* provide facilities to deal with ms-dos pathnames.  The 
cygwin authors/maintainers are in no position to change the zip tool. 
 Your points may be valid, in and of themselves, but to make the 
necesaary change, you'd have to take it up with the maintainers of zip.

I happen to believe that the current goals of the project are rather 
well considered.  I'm looking forward to the day when any Unix/Linux app 
runs on Win32 with a simple compile or a simple installshield/rpm/deb 
binary install.  At that point, the operating system becomes a commodity 
(especially if the app runs on MacOS X as well).  Then, given the choice 
between 2 commodities, the users will pick the cheapest one.  Free (in 
the liberty sense) software will prevail (at least at the OS level) and 
Win32 will simply no longer be needed, except to support legacy 
Win32-only apps.  That will be a blessing to all people who depend on 
software.  This is why I'd have a very hard time classifying cygwin as 
"closed."

-- 
Jason Dufair - jase AT dufair DOT org
http://www.dufair.org/
"The oldest one captains the bleak white ship of bone with palsied hands
The one of middle years wears a hope like chains
The youngest one cries tears of scarlet, and adjusts her latest smile"
-- ToasterLeavings




--
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/