Re: Press for Cygwin

[Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu>]

Jonathon Merz wrote:

>>
>>
>>> Does anyone know how we can adapt the archives so that they are not 
>>> WinZip
>>> readable?  Would just converting everything to .bz2 do that?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems like it.  WinZip 8.0 won't read a cron-3.0.1-4.tar.bz2 file I have.
>>
> <soapbox>


</me chops your soapbox up for firewood>


> Just some comments:  I do fully support the use of bzip2 over gzip 
> because it compresses better, but I think using it purely to thwart 
> WinZip users would be a bad reason to do so.  


Really?  when (a) using WinZip results in a BROKEN installation, (b) 
users who say "I installed cygwin using WinZip" on this mailing list are 
immediately told -- "reinstall using setup.exe" (because winzip-created 
  cygwin "installations" are irretrievably BROKEN), and (c) because it's 
technically POSSIBLE right now to "install" cygwin using WinZip, we get 
newbies who ignore the HUGE @#$(& link on the cygwin webpage for the 
setup program and use WinZip to "install" at least once a week --

You think we're out of line for trying to make it hard for *new users* 
to shoot themselves in the foot?

> Deliberate limitations 
> compatibility for the sake of limiting compatibility is something that 
> many people dislike about Microsoft, and I don't see that it improves 
> anything, ever. 


But WinZip is ALREADY "incompatible" -- while you can "unzip" the 
.tar.gz files and get something that LOOKS like a cygwin installation -- 
it isn't.  Isn't an obvious, upfront refusal to allow this better than 
enabling users to "install" a broken system by using the WRONG tool?

> On the other hand, if there is a legitimate reason to 
> do something, and limiting compatibility is a side effect, then so be 
> it. 


DING DING DING! We have a winner!

> Likewise, while we all appreciate the efficiency of command-line 
> tools, trying to thwart users of WinZip is kind of elitist, and for 
> those who have gotten to be called "System Administrators" without 
> learning much in the way of command line tools, our efforts would be 
> better spent teaching them to patch their IIS servers before we try to 
> teach them to use the command line :)


Irrelevant.  Setup.exe is already a GUI tool -- despite continual 
requests by "elitists" to add commandline/batch capability.  These 
"elitists" are not 31337 enough to do add/contribute the necessary 
capabilities themselves, so it hasn't been done.  So much for "elitism".

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/