X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0	tests=BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TW_YG,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik6GHXtfXT_XSRtTmeEEx8bry9Er26fAUojpI3y@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTilNtTrx2Z9ubWBLcedCC38AXaYBm59y439_oBtb AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	<m2g845c0f81005080622saed8506v996acc4c756c64e3 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	<AANLkTim_LLx6oY1HhxfipgSRBFSHD0OOQwhacy5CzMmN AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	<AANLkTikX700vW_j3GSRoJQS4yss2Ol0QRfyL9h_iBUxl AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 64 DOT 1005102038480 DOT 25680 AT tyr DOT diku DOT dk> <i2td855668f1005101319ge606771rf18782c4739525dc AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 64 DOT 1005110729140 DOT 14594 AT tyr DOT diku DOT dk> <AANLkTik6GHXtfXT_XSRtTmeEEx8bry9Er26fAUojpI3y AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
From: David Eisner <deisner AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 09:15:20 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimHLKV3ISjm1rj62yWxQq2QWm0Vr94j3dDkhziE@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Cygwin visual brand
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Alex Leigh <leigh AT hcs DOT harvard DOT edu> wrote:
> Why not just use the "cyg-" prefix, like the cygstart and cygpath
> tools already do? Something like "cygsetup", "cygpackage",
> "cygpackman", etc. I think these both communicate clearly the purpose
> of the program and are short to type.

I'd vote for cygsetup.exe.  I agree that setup.exe is too generic.  I
always wind up renaming it to something like cygsetup.exe.

By the way, I'm not sure if this is an issue, but something with
"setup" in it might be desirable as this string will be detected by
Vista's installer detection heuristic (scroll down to "Installer
Detection Technology" in [1]).  I believe Windows 7 does this, too,
but I'm not sure. If the requested execution level is specified in a
application manifest, though, this isn't necessary.

-David

[1] http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc709628(WS.10).aspx

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple