Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: RE: name: GNU/cygwin system Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 15:00:29 -0400 Message-ID: <3D848382FB72E249812901444C6BDB1D0BA8F2@exchange.timesys.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Robb, Sam" To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g4LJ7IJ26487 > I don't disagree with your conclusion, Chris, but you're > using a flawed > model. So *what* if cygwin is the most popular project on > sources.redhat? Just for the record: any number of "unix + windows" related searches ("bash for windows", "gnu for windows", "unix for windows", "gcc for windows", "free windows compiler", etc.) turn up the Cygwin home in the top ten links (in most of my examples, as the #1 link.) At my previous company - with many hardcore Windows software folks - I think that just about everyone had at least heard of Cygwin, and a majority of us had used it at one point or another (either at work, at home, or both.) Keep in mind, this was in Pittsburgh, PA - not Silicon Valley, Boston, or any other traditional hotbed of cutting-edge technology. Anecdotal evidence, perhaps. But I honestly don't think that Cygwin has any kind of visibility problem. -Samrobb -- 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/