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
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 21:23:47 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: press for cygwin
Message-ID: <20010903212347.A3959@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E334 AT IIS000> <3B939A12 DOT 5040009 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010903111442 DOT D2024 AT redhat DOT com> <999555859 DOT 31754 DOT 24 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <999555859.31754.24.camel@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 08:24:18AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>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 <obfuscated archive
>name> without setup.exe?"

Originally, I was idly wondering if the fact that we were using .bz2
files would be enough to act as a full stop for people who read an
article where they were instructed to use WinZip.

I thought it was better to have something not work entirely than sorta
seem to work but...  In the former case, at least people who care will
start asking questions early.

My idle question as followed by moral outrage over the fact that I hated
WinZip and all that it stood for.

Now, the thread has merged with the "If you add -cygwin to-cygwin
all-cygwin your-cygwin packages-cygwin, everything.cyg, will.cyg,
be.cgz, great.cgb" thread.

I agree that by changing the file names to something besides .tar.gz or
.tar.bzw we are actually obfuscating the meaning for people who might be
able to scratch out a clue about what these files might be.

>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!

Now, there you go.  I knew that all of us core developers despised WinZip.
Pthth!  I spit on WinZip.

"My name is Inigo Montoya, you are the program that ruined my cygwin
distribution.  Prepare to die!"

>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.

Now, Robert.  I'm sure that a few well placed explanations on the cygwin
mailing list will suffice.  Maybe a yearly posting, too.  Surely, that
is all that would be required.

cgf

(Hmm.  I guess I'd better go delete WinZip from my system now...)

--
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/