Gentoo Archives: gentoo-cygwin

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-cygwin@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-cygwin] Hello!
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:02:28
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-cygwin] Hello! by Eddie Parker
Eddie Parker wrote:
> > roger wrote: >> On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 14:30 -0800, Eddie Parker wrote: >> >> >>> Anyhow, is there anyone listening/reading this mailing list anymore? >>> What's the status of this project, if so? >>> >> >> I'm listening, but there hasn't been much activity as far as I know. >> >> I think most would rather spend time programming a native linux program. >> >> 4 or 5 years ago, I used to spend time debugging programs for porting to >> cygwin or windows, but I have advanced to other things now. >> >> > I can't say I blame you. I've been following the instructions on the > wiki [1], and while I've got it working, it seems that most packages > require tweaking to get to work... I can imagine the debugging would be > intensive to, when things don't work. :( > > That said, if there are people who are interested in this sort of stuff, > it might be nice to see what the status of the previous project > was(/is?). Top of my mind are questions such as: > > 1.- Does anyone know if the Gentoo community is/was willing to have the > 'Cygwin' arch as a 'supported' arch within portage? [2] > 2.- Did any of the previous maintainers/visionaries for this project > have any thoughts about replacing in-use files such as Python? Be-it > through windows' typical "reboot" methodology or some such? > 3.- At the very least, was it/would it be possible to have a script that > create a portage overlay from Cygwin's setup.ini, so you can get binary > packages installed with emerge as a start? > > I'm not naive enough to think I'm the only one to've thought of these > things, so I'm actually just curious if there were technical limitations > to any/all of these that I'm not aware of. Just trying to get a read of > how this project went! > > Cheers, > > -e- > > [1] > [2] I'm not sure if I'm using the right terminology, basically to have > it be an ACCEPTED_KEYWORD, and having ebuilds as part of portage that > support it? >
I don't run Cygwin at home, but I do run it at work. I have never even attempted to use Gentoo Cygwin. Quite frankly, Cygwin is a crutch. It has no practical business use cases on a Windows server (not that there are many practical business use cases for Windows servers in general, given the license costs.) :) On a desktop, nearly all of the open source applications that I use have native Windows ports now, and some of them, for example R, actually have a *better* user interface than the original Linux version. Basically, if you want a Linux desktop, you're better off installing Linux, and if you need a mixed Windows/Linux desktop, you're better off with VMware Workstation. Finally, if you are a die-hard Cygwin fan, there is Cygwin-Ports, a community that is far more active than Gentoo Cygwin. And Cygwin's package management system isn't all that bad on its own. But it ain't Linux. -- gentoo-cygwin@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-cygwin] Hello! roger <roger@××××××.com>