Tue Nov 8 04:50:00 GMT 2011
On 11/7/2011 11:17 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I've been trying not to offer an opinion here but it isn't clear to me
> why so many people voted +1 for this package. It seems like we're
> adding a huge package
Meh, if you exclude the star catalogs (and I think we should; and the OP
has agreed to avoid), then bin+src weighs in at 25MB (65MB
uncompressed), which is pretty large but not unheard of.
Most of that is because it has a ton of exe's, and all but one are
linked statically to various support libraries. (Oddly all of those
libs get dumped together into the DLL, and that dll is used by only one
client. But, conceivably, the other exes could also link to that dll,
for a big win: from 45MB uncompressed to approx 2.5MB, based on my
> to the distribution just to help out a very
> miniscule user base.
Meh, without casting aspersions, I doubt the user base of our various
specialized math tools -- like singular, octave, fftw3, qhull, etc --
are very large in absolute terms. But...we have maintainers, they
volunteered and contributed, so here we are. If they go AWOL, then the
package gets slapped with _obsolete.
Same deal here.
> Do we really need this package in the Cygwin
Well, not as such, no. We don't really NEED very much of what's
currently part of the distro -- but that's never been the justification
for package acceptance. Do we "need" fortune or robots?
I think it's kinda cool for cygwin be one of the first (not THE first;
it's already in BSD ports IIUC) to provide these tools, so that's why I
However, you're still (one of the) benevolent(?) dictators-for-life.
Are you exercising a veto? If so, we can teach the OP how to set up an
add-on setup.exe repository, like cygwin-ports, which he can host over
at astronomytortilla or whatever -- so it's not a "disaster" if you are
More information about the Cygwin-apps