Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: press for cygwin From: Robert Collins To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com In-Reply-To: <20010903111442.D2024@redhat.com> References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E334 AT IIS000> <3B939A12 DOT 5040009 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010903111442 DOT D2024 AT redhat DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/0.12 (Preview Release) Date: 04 Sep 2001 08:24:18 +1000 Message-Id: <999555859.31754.24.camel@lifelesswks> Mime-Version: 1.0 On 03 Sep 2001 11:14:42 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: I think we should name the files .cgf. It just seems right. > > It's probably possible to add magic number detection to setup.exe to > circumvent this but then, once again, we're moving into development > areas that need more than just a good idea for anything to happen. I got the impression that this thread started with the goal of confusing Winzip, but not native cygwin utilities. Whilst I like the .deb/.rpm layered approach, that _will_ confuse native utilities, or we will have to field question s about "How do I manually install without setup.exe?" IMO we have a community awareness that Winzip is evil - for past and current readers of this list - and that changing the question by renaming the files will result in more questions that no-one but a developer thinks to answer. Which is not what we want! Even if the files where to be packaged as a well-known format - say .rpm - there would still be questions, but at least then we would have the option of pointing the user at a generic rpm list. Rob -- 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/