cygwin.bat fails

Mark Farnan
Mon May 31 21:10:00 GMT 1999

Oh you poor misguided amateur :-(

These are the typical comments of one who probably does not really know the
ins and outs of WINNT and its capabilities, but just blows his horn for
something different, just to be heard. Again, I though we had better things
to do than this.

I haves used Solaris, Linux WINNT, and NT wins 8 out of 10 times for what I
want to use it for, and always for a Generic File/Application server,
especially when intergating an Enteprise with Windows 95/98 or NT on the
Desktop.  Linux / Solaris however also have there place and are very good at
what they do.  I will be quite happy when LINUX is as capable, flexible,
MANAGEABLE, secure and as well supported in the IT industry as NT, then
there will be more choice for given applications, but in its current market
segment, NT kills the rest on price/performance/supportability.

Oh, and please don't go on about Linux being 'FREE' as the price of the
software is only about 20% of the TCO for supporting a given environment.
Its lack of vendor support, controlled source/patching quite make sup the
difference for the average corporate environment at present.

NT most certainly has its faults, and some are quite major, but so does

As for WIN95/98, it is the most broken OS ever to see the light of day, with
so much legacy, supporting it in a real IT environment is a nightmare.
Great for the home/games user, but YUK for any serious development or a
stable platform for bussiness use.  More and more Enterprise customers in
Australia and Europe (I don' know about the US) are going to NT throughout,
many coupled with a UNIX  (HP-UX / SOLARIS) backend and NT server's.

I too will be glad when Windows 2000 is released, as it is fully bassed on
the NT kernal/core and the 3.1/95/98 legacy is GONE !!!

If I were Cygnus, I would't concentrate too much effort into 95/98 as within
3 years it will be dead, (From a commercial standpoint) after Windows 2000
is released.

Of course, if you hate windows so much....why are you interested in CYGWIN
at all ??.

Mark Farnan
Senior NT Engineer
Mission Critical Support Center
Hewlett Packard Australia

-- This position is my own and in no manner reflects the positon of my

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of Glenn Spell
> Sent: Monday, 17 May 1999 6:25
> To:
> Subject: Re: cygwin.bat fails
> Since neither Suhaib nor Greg had the time or disposition to make
> proper attributions in their respective messages, please forgive me
> if I erred in trying to cover their misgivings.
> Greg Martin <> wrote:
> > In private email, Suhaib M. Siddiqi <> wrote:
> >
> > > You can make better use of Cygwin if you upgrade to Win NT.
> > > Win98 and 95 are too flaky and are meant only playing games, not
> > > for serious computings.
> Actually, Win95/98 have no competition, to speak of, in their
> particular market segmet, the desktop OS. It's the best thing.
> WinNT, on the other hand, serves no particular purpose in its
> particular market segment, the server OS. Almost every other
> contender in that segment runs circles around NT. Why would anyone
> with half a brain even consider using NT as a server when there are
> so many more reasons to use FreeBSD, Linux, or even Solaris.
> The only people, by and large, who use NT are those who get paid to
> do so. And the decision to pay them is made by those who have little
> or no knowledge of what they are buying, in terms of software and
> personnel. They're buying "hype".
> And, of course, Microsoft prices NT out of the desktop market.  A few
> people, for one reason or another, end up using NT as a desktop OS.
> Due primarily to its heretage (OS/2), NT does perform most tasks as a
> desktop OS better than Win95/98. But not being positioned to compete
> in that market, it's not a contender.
> Even those shops that claim to be an "NT Shop" probably have more
> Win95/98 seats in the house than WinNT. In fact, there are probably
> still more Win31 seats in corporate America than WinNT.
> So, anyone (including you and Cygnus) who brushs aside the Win95/98
> market does so at their own peril. Cygwin fits like a hand-in-glove
> with Windows 95 and Windows 98.
> > Personally I prefer FreeBSD for programming but want to use cygwin
> > for some windows projects. Personally I'd like to see ms os's done
> > away with all together but I have a recording studio and the ware I
> > use requires mswindows. What's a sod to do? :-)
> Guess you'll just have to keep using Pegasus for FreeBSD.  ;-)
> > > Greg Martin <> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I can run sh then bash just fine but there seems to be a
> > > > problem with the bat file that the start menu accesses. I can't
> > > > see a problem and am hopiung someone can for me. The errors I
> > > > get are:
> > > > Too many parameters
> > > > Bad command or file name
> Is the .BAT file formatted in DOS/Windows style or Unix?
> > > > The bat file looks like this:
> > > > @ECHO OFF
> > > > bash
> Add "REM " before "@ECHO OFF" to help see what's happening.
> > > > I'm thrilled to have unix emulation on mswindows.
> Then what will you do if your wish that "ms os's done away with all
> together" comes true?
> > > > Any chance I'll get a core dump instead of the blue screen of
> > > > death? ;-)
> Core dumps are coming with the next release. The BSODs will always be
> with us.
> -glenn
> --
>  )      Glenn Spell <>      )   _       _____
>  )   Fayetteville, North Carolina, C. S. A.   )_ (__\____o /_/_ |
>  )  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  )   >-----._/_/__]>
>  )- blue skies - happy trails - sweet dreams -)             `0  |
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Send a message to

Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to

More information about the Cygwin mailing list