Re: cygwin-man

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 06:59:05PM -0700, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
>The majority of the tools Cygwin provides are part of the Free Software
>Foundation's GNU Operating System.

I don't know that this is true but, regardless, the term "GNU Operating
System" doesn't make any sense to me.

 (In
>       fact,  Cygwin  was  once known as GNU/Win32.)

I don't think there is any reason to mention this.  It is really ancient
history now.

>As such, the user environment is more similar to a GNU/Linux system
>than, for example, Sun Solaris.

I find the term GNU/Linux a real abomination.  If this was an
FSF-sponsored project, we'd be forced to use it.  Since it isn't, I'd
prefer just "Linux".

>However, the FSF has put
>great effort into maintaining compatibility with standard UNIX
>utilities where possible, so assuming the necessary utilities are
>installed most scripts will run without editing on both UNIX and
>Cygwin.

I'm not sure that this caveat is really needed.  Linux is popular enough
nowdays that you don't really have to make apologies for this.

(I wouldn't be surprised to find that you found these words somewhere
within cygwin's own documentation.  That doesn't make them any more
desirable, though.)

>If you find a bug in Cygwin, please provide a patch to fix the bug.
>There are instructions at:
>
>http://cygwin.com/contrib.html
>
>If you cannot do this, at the very least read
>
>http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
>
>and follow the instructions for reporting found there.

You should probably change the order here.  Even I don't expect *everyone*
to provide a patch.  So, the order would be report a bug intelligently and
then think about providing a patch.

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/