Link for MORE

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 11:44:07AM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Back to the original subject, 'more', what if we actually provided a
>more.exe binary?  more != less, since they DO behave differently.  If
>somebody wanted to adapt the attached source (taken from the util-linux
>distribution) so that it builds within cygutils, I'd add it to the
>package.  See /usr/doc/cygutils-1.0.0/HOW-TO-CONTRIBUTE

If someone wants to contribute, I think it should just be a standard
package.

Chuck, I hate to say this, but I don't see a real reason for growing
cygutils.  The more packages we add to cygutils, the more we go back to
the old way of installing cygwin packages -- with less fine-grained
control.

Maybe there is a good reason to have a general purpose utils package
that I'm missing.  It just seems to me that this is adding a focus for
the cygwin package release on you -- a single point of contact.
Theoretically, we could be sharing the load if the contributed pieces of
cygutils were made into true cygwin packages.

cgf