| www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > How is that not good publicity? There are a ton of cygwin binaries out > >there; all you need to find them is usually the package name, "cygwin", >and google. I know Gerrit, who maintains a lot of packages, also has >a large number of things he's built and put out there with no intention >to maintain them. That's really sufficient; without someone responsible >for maintaining them, they should only be available unofficially. > > > Good point. Unmaintained projects should be dropped when they no longer work or are too outdated. SGI had a "contrib" CD (later became 2 CD's) that was totally composed of unofficial, "volunteer effort" projects. No official support and provided on an "as is" basis. They were only kept on the CD(s) while they worked, or as long as they had someone "sponsoring" a "util". Mostly the CDs were composed of IRIX ports of Gnu based utils... It was just done as a convenience for interested customers. It was also only composed of tools actually submitted for inclusion -- not "one of's" or hacks that people didn't want included. But all of this discussion is moot if there is no high level interest in providing 3rd party links or a cygwin-contrib section to setup. Having all package dependancies specified in the "setup" format _might_ be another obstacle to 3rd party ports of existing rpm packages. Rpm could be enhanced to work with/around Window's file-copy semantics -- if by no other method that using "sysinternals.com" "movefile" utility which allows replacing of "in use" files (followed by a reboot to finish the install just as setup does). -linda -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |