Re: Name for new port WAS: new port

[Sux0r Dani San <kput@myrealbox.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Geert Stappers <stappers@macwheel.xs4all.nl>
To: Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:22:56 +0200
Subject: Name for new port WAS: new port

At 13:44 +0200 8/21/01, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
>> Previously A Mennucc1 wrote:
>> > the proposed name is  'Debian GNU/win'
>>
>> At the very least that should be win32.
>
>While thinking about it: since The Hurd is called hurd-i386 in the
>archive, the archive name for cygwin should probably be win32-i386. We
>should probably change all other archs to linux-arch too, don't we?
>

>My suggestion is  cygwin-ia32


Well, there is the fact that is possible in the future to exist a cygwin devel environment for the upcoming Ms Windows for IA64. Also, there exists the possibility of cygwin being ported to any of the other platforms NT exists on (ppc, mips, alpha...), so Any reference to Intel, or 32 bits architecture would be incorrect. As the only characteristic common to all the potential platforms involved is the use of windows (cygwin isnt as programs compiled statically / against newlib | mingw or even with propietary compilers but licensed under GPL or other free licenses apply also). Even theres other factor to count on, and is the possibility of any other OS for which cygwin environment is ported (for example, ReactOS). 

Summing up:

  - The names including references to Intel, win32, 32 or cygwin cannot be used, cause are incorrect, confusing or licensed (perhaps they arent incorrect now, but changing the name in the future would take us to another unnecesary discussion).

  - So, as the only thing in common for all the potential targets of this Debian distribution is the existence of a common windows environment in all of them. IMHO, a name like Debian / GNU win would be correct, and so this is my suggestion.


Greetings,

Daniel Cabezas