X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=pvD5tDhyXTbntYEm q4TPwFGDCzLaCP1V9BjguZWgnhD7c+OSw8uUABm4VGpP3u4mGHwBsOZfg5zHtMMN dO64T+Nx6tQEAPDNuh4TBS6yOLbsOcPDJhYxNwNdEKAtwHAY5EoAvcyBfRUsvZFH Z+VpAphMFDH/YoHDcx0n3G9NZlI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=7FzYr6czZKTLGLvzGZ/IXE 1Z9JA=; b=fq69tDIRcuJTkb5744iHalwtJDDdomO5fT8LrX+95vPggFSNaAfqWW tk2IT+q6OLww+qXAyFc+SSDZgYDKbseJ/yxNCsgldCPSmeMI7gyReLp21rbAaqn4 Gj64Bv/i9nCujdgOcmCDUi7IDubX4JrwbZmLjHi8f0nc9/NuSCs1o= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=replies, our, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: smtp.webfaction.com Subject: Re: Is our use of Cygwin to build & run OpenOCD a good one? To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: From: Bob Cochran Message-ID: <57b68911-8425-dd1a-95ee-ddb55b935f39@mindchasers.com> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 14:49:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes On 5/20/19 10:27 AM, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote: > Erik Soderquist, on Monday, May 20, 2019 10:16 AM, wrote... >> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 3:44 PM Bob Cochran wrote: >> >>> "Cygwin? this is probably still functional, but now can be considered a >>> (pre)historic solution." >> The words of the ignorant, in my opinion. Cygwin has done an >> excellent job of maintaining currency and usefulness. > Indeed. I have been using cygwin since 1996-7. Can't remember the exact year, but it has been God-sent, and it has been in every Windows machine I have had control. Just my 0.02. Thanks. Thank you to everyone who has replied to my question whether this was a good use case for Cygwin!  It was great to read all of the replies and see that I'm in sync with this project & its users / developers. As others have basically stated, it's like a Windows 10 Swiss Army knife - pull it out of your pocket when needed and get the job done without a hassle. Bob > > josé > > -- > Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple