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
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:27:31 +0100
Message-ID: <3E804EAB00019620@mss4n.bluewin.ch>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303271051210.29489-100000@localhost.localdomain>
From: "Yann Crausaz" <yann_crausaz AT bluemail DOT ch>
Subject: Re: RPM-4.1 port to Cygwin available
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: "Ronald Landheer-Cieslak" <ronald AT landheer DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Your views are right, BUT poeple who were use to work under *NIX (like me)
really like to find known tools as they have to change their working environment
, and poeple trying to execute *NIX binaries under Cygwin will always exist
! Don't you think so ?


>-- Message original --
>Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:54:36 +0100 (CET)
>From: Ronald Landheer-Cieslak <ronald AT landheer DOT com>
>To: Shankar Unni <shankar AT cotagesoft DOT com>
>cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
>Subject: Re: RPM-4.1 port to Cygwin available
>
>
>On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Shankar Unni wrote:
>> Yann Crausaz wrote:
>> > The version of setup.exe I propose must be a bit old, isn't it ? If
there's
>> > a real interest, I'm OK to care about the latest version, but will poeple
>> > really use RPM under Cygwin ? 
>> The real benefit to porting RPM or apt-get or whatever to Windows is as
>
>> a possible replacement for the current installation system (if anyone

>> considers RPM, and its associated GUIs, an improvement, that is).
>I can see it now:
>"I downloaded the abcdef RPM from my local LUG mirror and it didn't work
>- 
>why?"
>.. umm.. Linux executable?
>
>I really think it is a Good Thing to have a Windows application that has
>
>no equivalent under *NIX take care of Cygwin installation - only a few 
>days ago someone tried to run what he called a "Standard Binary" (i.e. a
>
>Linux executable) under Cygwin and I'm *sure* that will happen a *lot* 
>more often if we use one of the more-or-less standard installers from 
>Linux distributions to install our stuff..
>
>rlc
>
>
>
>--
>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/
>


--
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/