Re: philosophy question

Re: philosophy question

[Georg Klein]

> Date:          Wed, 05 Nov 1997 17:06:42 -0600
> From:          Darren Rauckman <raucd@sk.sympatico.ca>
> Reply-to:      raucd@sk.sympatico.ca
> To:            gnu-win32@cygnus.com
> Subject:       Re: philosophy question

> > i don't see a conflict. My goal is simple: to take as much control
> > as possible of NT away from microsoft and into the free software
> > community, so that on those rare cases when I have to use NT, I
> > don't use their miserable tools, their expensive software, or
> > depend on their unreliable SDKs. "Embrace and extend". gnu-win32
> > is a step toward that end. In the limit, we boot an NT kernel and
> > run only gnu tools on top. Now that would be fun.
> 
> That is the best thing I have heard in a long time.  DOWN WITH
> MICROSOFT!!
> 

Hi,

to me, there remains one simple question: why booting an NT-Kernel 
and work with gnu-tools, when you van have that much better: use, for 
example, linux, use FreeBSD and you have alle the gnu-tools you want 
without using a Microsoft OS!

Georg 
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Re: philosophy question

[Philip Paul K. Denno]

Georg Klein wrote:
> 
> > Date:          Wed, 05 Nov 1997 17:06:42 -0600
> > From:          Darren Rauckman <raucd@sk.sympatico.ca>
> > Reply-to:      raucd@sk.sympatico.ca
> > To:            gnu-win32@cygnus.com
> > Subject:       Re: philosophy question
> 
> > > i don't see a conflict. My goal is simple: to take as much control
> > > as possible of NT away from microsoft and into the free software
> > > community, so that on those rare cases when I have to use NT, I
> > > don't use their miserable tools, their expensive software, or
> > > depend on their unreliable SDKs. "Embrace and extend". gnu-win32
> > > is a step toward that end. In the limit, we boot an NT kernel and
> > > run only gnu tools on top. Now that would be fun.
> >
> > That is the best thing I have heard in a long time.  DOWN WITH
> > MICROSOFT!!
> >
> 
> Hi,
> 
> to me, there remains one simple question: why booting an NT-Kernel
> and work with gnu-tools, when you van have that much better: use, for
> example, linux, use FreeBSD and you have alle the gnu-tools you want
> without using a Microsoft OS!
> 
> Georg
> -
> For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
> "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Not everything about Microsoft OS (NT that is, not Nightmare95) is bad,
so to have a UNIX like shell on top provides the best of both worlds.
Also just for variety throw Linux on your system and life couldn't be
better.

Philip.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Re: philosophy question

[Geoffrey Noer]

Steven Bellenot wrote:
> 
> I see three directions gnuwin32 could/should go:
> 1. Providing Unix based tools that are usable in win32. How a person
> can live without a reasonable shell, diff, grep and friends ...
> 2. Provide a development environment for the translation of the
> vast freeware of unix to win32.
> 3. Make an environment as nearly unix-like as possible.
> 
> I see some conflict in these goals. For example #1 would make files
> as nearly dos.like as possible while #3 would make the files as
> nearly unix-like as possible.

All three are goals.  The goal of having an environment that's as
unix-like as possible is the one where compromises will happen when
absolutely necessary.

Note that providing a Unix environment for Win32 is not really
something core to Cygnus' plans.  Cygnus' concern is providing quality
Win32-hosted cross-compilers that (eventually) will include an IDE
exhibiting native Win32 look and feel.

But I expect that the quality of the Unix-like environment will
continue to increase over time as people here at Cygnus and people
out on the net contribute to the project.

-- 
Geoffrey Noer
noer@cygnus.com
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Re: philosophy question

[Darren Rauckman]

> i don't see a conflict. My goal is simple: to take as much control as
> possible of NT away from microsoft and into the free software community,
> so that on those rare cases when I have to use NT, I don't use their
> miserable tools, their expensive software, or depend on their unreliable
> SDKs. "Embrace and extend". gnu-win32 is a step toward that end. In the
> limit, we boot an NT kernel and run only gnu tools on top. Now that would be
> fun.

That is the best thing I have heard in a long time.  DOWN WITH
MICROSOFT!!


-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Re: philosophy question

[Steven Bellenot]

> 
> On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, Steven Bellenot wrote:
> > I see three directions gnuwin32 could/should go:
> > 1. Providing Unix based tools that are usable in win32. How a person
> > can live without a reasonable shell, diff, grep and friends ...
> > 2. Provide a development environment for the translation of the
> > vast freeware of unix to win32.
> > 3. Make an environment as nearly unix-like as possible.
> 
> i don't see a conflict. My goal is simple: to take as much control as
> possible of NT away from microsoft and into the free software community,
> so that on those rare cases when I have to use NT, I don't use their
> miserable tools, their expensive software, or depend on their unreliable
> SDKs. "Embrace and extend". gnu-win32 is a step toward that end. In the 
> limit, we boot an NT kernel and run only gnu tools on top. Now that would be 
> fun. 
> 
> ron
> 

Whereas I agree with your goal I would say you fit into goal #3.
I would say you would want an environment shell that completely
hides the MicroSoft layer below. You would have no need of tools
that co-exist, or live in a stand alone environment.

From a #3 view point, it might be better to replace MS lame login
with an /etc/passwd based system but that certainly would not fit
a #1 view point


-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

Re: philosophy question

[Ron G. Minnich]

On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, Steven Bellenot wrote:
> I see three directions gnuwin32 could/should go:
> 1. Providing Unix based tools that are usable in win32. How a person
> can live without a reasonable shell, diff, grep and friends ...
> 2. Provide a development environment for the translation of the
> vast freeware of unix to win32.
> 3. Make an environment as nearly unix-like as possible.

i don't see a conflict. My goal is simple: to take as much control as
possible of NT away from microsoft and into the free software community,
so that on those rare cases when I have to use NT, I don't use their
miserable tools, their expensive software, or depend on their unreliable
SDKs. "Embrace and extend". gnu-win32 is a step toward that end. In the 
limit, we boot an NT kernel and run only gnu tools on top. Now that would be 
fun. 

ron
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".

philosophy question

[Steven Bellenot]

I see three directions gnuwin32 could/should go:
1. Providing Unix based tools that are usable in win32. How a person
can live without a reasonable shell, diff, grep and friends ...
2. Provide a development environment for the translation of the
vast freeware of unix to win32.
3. Make an environment as nearly unix-like as possible.

I see some conflict in these goals. For example #1 would make files
as nearly dos.like as possible while #3 would make the files as
nearly unix-like as possible.

-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".