Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/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
Message-ID: <BE684E2C997AD51199530002A56B20796C3652@MCHH2A1E>
From: Mellman Thomas <Thomas DOT Mellman AT icn DOT siemens DOT de>
To: "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: A proposal for a Cygnus naming convention
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 15:46:45 +0200 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="ISO-8859-1"

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 3:42 PM
>>To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>>Subject: Re: A proposal for a Cygnus naming convention
>>
>>
>>On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 08:38:32AM +0200, Mellman Thomas wrote:
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com]
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 5:19 PM
>>>>>To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>>>>>Subject: Re: A proposal for a Cygnus naming convention
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 09:32:00AM +0200, Mellman Thomas wrote:
>>>>>>Given the registry name:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>HKLM\software\Cygnus solutions\cygwin\mounts v2\/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>May I suggest that the blank in the name is superfluous 
>>and problematic
>>>>>>for processing by Unix-type tools - even in the registry. 
>> Bill may
>>>>>>feel vindicated that *his* OS tolerates blanks, but does 
>>it really add
>>>>>>significant readibility?
>>>>>
>>>>>You can suggest anything, however, what you are suggesting 
>>>>>makes no sense:
>>>>>
>>>>>1) The cygwin registry entry is not intended to be manipulated by
>>>>>   "Unix-type tools".  Use *mount* if you want to manipulate it.
>>>>>
>>>>>2) Changing the name would break backwards compatibility.
>>>>>
>>>>>3) Even if you wanted to use "Unix-type" tools, a space is 
>>really not an
>>>>>   obstacle.  Unix certainly can deal with spaces.
>>>>>
>>>>>So, bottom line is that there is absolutely no way that we'll be
>>>>>changing anything.  You should just be considering the 
>>registry to be a
>>>>>black box, anyway.  The cygwin DLL deals just fine with the current
>>>>>scheme.
>>>
>>>I didn't mean to say that anything needs to be changed.
>>
>>I hope you have mirrors so that you can see behind yourself 
>>while you're
>>backpeddling.
>>
>>If you weren't proposing that anything should be changed, then why did
>>you even bother sending your message?
>>
>>>It was only a suggestion for the future.
>>
>>Oh.  So, you *were* proposing that something should be changed.
>>
>>If I somehow gave you the impression that anything you sent would be
>>taken as a high priority task, then I apologize.  I'm not sure how
>>I gave you the impression that I would take anything as you said
>>as other than a suggestion.
>>
>>>But to suggest that the registry is a black box is simply gates-ian.
>>>That's a big advantage of unix: it doesn't try to hide 
>>things from the
>>>users.  Hopefully, cygwin developers aren't so close that they're
>>>seduced by the dark side.
>>
>>And, here we avoid addressing the issues and go off on a tangent.  I'd
>>have a lot easier time with your points if you weren't insistent on
>>being insulting.  Smugly mentioning "Bill", suggesting dark sides, and
>>calling things "gatesian" probably provides you with some kind of
>>nebulous feeling of superiority however, it really doesn't do much to
>>advance your suggestion.
>>
>>Lets focus back on my response to your suggestion.
>>
>>How would you propose maintaining backwards compatibility?  Are you
>>suggesting that we should eliminate spaces in the registry names and
>>cause older versions of cygwin to be incapable of reading registry
>>entries created by newer versions?  And, the rationale for 
>>doing this is
>>purely aesthetic?  If so, were you going to be around after your
>>"suggestion for the future" was implemented to handle the inevitable
>>mailing list complaints?
>>
>>You also haven't suggested a good reason for ignoring the use of
>>perfectly functional mount command and the mount function.  I suspect
>>(although I'm sure you will do some more backpeddling denials here)
>>that you probably didn't know that the mount command manipulated
>>the registry and that you're probably equally unaware that there
>>(obviously) are functions available for doing things programatically.
>>
>>You haven't even provided a good basis for making this fundamental
>>change other than "spaces bad -- Microsoft use spaces!".  The concept
>>that space present a challenge to "Unix-type tools" is really rather
>>laughable.  In absence of details on what your problems are, the only
>>conclusion that I can draw is that you are probably rather 
>>unskilled in
>>the use of said tools.
>>
>>cgf



Okay, it's clear now that it won't be possible to keep things easy to parse.

--
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/