From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14895 invoked by alias); 11 Jan 2009 04:05:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 14887 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jan 2009 04:05:50 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-96-233-71-199.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (96.233.71.199) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 Jan 2009 04:05:18 +0000 Received: from ednor.cgf.cx (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B6113C029 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:05:08 -0500 (EST) Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 856A22B385; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:05:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 04:56:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: pedantic/misled/confused/passive-aggressive (was Re: MinTTY 0.3.3) Message-ID: <20090111040508.GA8342@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00276.txt.bz2 I apologize for sidetracking the MinTTY thread. It was bugging me too much to see the same argument repeated a couple of days after they were already discussed. (I blame the choklat stout: http://www.southerntierbrewing.com/beers.html) As I've said, I think MinTTY is a nice program, getting better all of the time. It likely can't replace the current default cygwin shell and that's a pity. We could use something that was actively maintained with more of a linux look and feel. Just to contribute something useful: Chuck Wilson, if you are reading this, am I correct in assuming that you don't enjoy maintaining the Windows version of rxvt? If so, should we consider deprecating rxvt in favor of MinTTY when MinTTY becomes a real package? If not, there is no harm in keeping two packages in the distribution. I was just trying to lighten your load if you were interested. The other thing that I've always wanted was some way for the user to choose what they want to run without running cygwin.bat by hand. I think that would mean setup.exe modification though. cgf -- 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/