Re: [Dev-C++] Compiling Cygwin
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 11:54:05AM +0200, Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
> Le Jeudi 9 Mai 2002 02:20, John Ineson a écrit :
> > What you're setting out here is interesting, but is a bit different from
> > what was previously envisioned. The initial design was probably more
> > Debian/Cygwin than Debian/w32, but people have mentioned LINE too.
> > By making Cygwin optional I personally suspect you'd break an
> > unmanageable number of things, without really gaining much, BICBW.
>
> There are a number of excellent Windows native software and I don't see the
> reason why we should re-compile them under Cygwin.
Because of the simplicity. A port to Cygwin is a relatively simple job
-- get the essentials like dpkg building, then start building packages,
and fix them (or Cygwin) when you hit a problem.
What you suggest sounds interesting, but it is far more than just a port
of Debian. You talk about writing new code, which is a lot of work; and
adding native versions of packages -- remember you won't just be able to
build those from the Debian source packages, you'll have to package each
one yourself, and update them all when new versions are released.
This is why I'm inclined to stick with Debian as a base -- you get so
much 'for free' because it's already done by other people. If your idea
works I might well use it, but ATM I'm more interested in the first
model, because there hasn't been a great deal of action so far, and I
think it's a more achievable goal. But nobody is stopping you working on
something different -- by all means go for it.
--
John Ineson
``Is LaTeX hard to use? It's easy to use if you're one of the 2% of the
population who thinks logically and can read an instruction manual.'' -- LL
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-win32-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: