Re: Article about cygwin on UnixReview.com

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 03:24:12PM -0800, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>*** Christopher Faylor (cgf at redhat dot com) wrote today:
>
>CF> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 01:38:56PM -0800, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
>CF> >*** Corinna Vinschen (corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com) wrote today:
>CF> >
>CF> >CV> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 04:17:06PM -0500, Christopher Faylor
>CF> >CV> wrote:
>CF> >CV> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:49:39AM -0800, Joshua Daniel
>CF> >CV> > Franklin wrote:
>CF> >CV> > >Gagn? reviews Cygwin 1.3.20:
>CF> >CV> > >
>CF> >CV> > ><http://www.unixreview.com/documents/s=7822/sam0302web/>
>CF> >CV> >
>CF> >CV> > Huh.  Interesting.  Someone else has been casting around inside
>CF> >CV> > of Red Hat looking for someone to interview about Cygwin, too.
>CF> >CV> > Oddly enough, I wasn't the obvious choice for some reason.
>CF> >CV> >
>CF> >CV> > Too bad that this guy didn't just download links, lynx, or
>CF> >CV> > wget. It would have saved him some time.
>CF> >CV>
>CF> >CV> Yeah, we should probably ask him.
>CF> >
>CF> >Although I agree with this sentiment, I also feel that part of his
>CF> >point was to make it very clear that cygwin is some type of Linux or
>CF> >Unix, and everyone who knows how to build a package in Linux or Unix
>CF> >can do the same in Cygwin, and I believe that this point is very
>CF> >important for many people, so I wouldn't correct him that much.
>CF>
>CF> Um, I don't think that Corinna was suggesting that anyone should flame
>CF> him.  The only correction I can think of is "lynx and wget are already
>CF> available under cygwin."
>
>Huh?, I did not suggest flaming anyone. I have no idea where you got that
>idea from. I agree with your correction, though.

Sorry.  That was too strong a representation on my part.  I was under
the impression that you were suggesting that someone would be taking
this person to task by correcting him on a point by point basis or
something.

>CF> However, if your premise is correct, then one would expect that lynx
>CF> and wget might already exist in a linux distribution.
>
>I never stated anything like this. Re-read above.

We don't seem to be communicating well.  Your premise is that "his point
was to make it very clear that cygwin is some type of Linux or Unix".
Given that, wget and lynx would already exist on the system and there
would be no need to build either of these tools.  That's what I meant.

cgf

--
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/