cygwin bughunt (FAQ alert?)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:07:39PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Jan 27 09:00, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 08:16:37PM -0800, Brian Dessent wrote:
>>>I was actually a little curious about this, so I did a little
>>>experiment.  I sequestered away my normal Cygwin installation and
>>>started with a fresh install.  Aside from the default "base" packages
>>>that setup.exe intstalls out of the gate, I found that I only had to
>>>actually select three packages in setup: gcc, make, and perl.  (and
>>>Perl was required only for gendef it seems.)
>>
>>Well, that's it then.
>>
>>This is all WAY too complicated.
>>
>>How can we possibly expect people to do in-depth debugging of problems
>>in the DLL if we require them to have gcc, make, and perl on their
>>systems?  We can't expect people to be *perl hackers* if they want to
>>build cygwin.  Just the perl requirement alone would mean that they'd
>>waste months learning perl.
>
>If it comes to that, we also require them to run Cygwin to build Cygwin
>on Windows.  That's a pretty big hurdle, isn't it?

Yes! And this requirement that I have to send email to ask questions is
also huge.  I lose years of my life every time I have an email problem.
And, then having to send long whining emails about how hard it all is
takes valuable time, too.

I guess we don't want people to use cygwin after all.

cgf