RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robinow, David]

> From: Robert Collins [mailto:robert.collins@syncretize.net]
> Subject: RE: gzip.exe as symlink...
> > From: Jon Cast
> > Subject: Re: gzip.exe as symlink...
> > Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which
> > > is the real file?
> > If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.
> Then they presumably have the luxry of telling it what .exe to run. 
> Rob
 except that there isn't one.
  if gzip.exe is a (unusable outside cygwin) link to gunzip.exe, then
"gunzip" will read in a compressed file, but there is no switch to gunzip
which will allow recompressing the file on output.
  if gunzip.exe is a (unusable outside cygwin) link to gzip.exe,
then "gzip -d" will read in a compressed file, and "gzip" will allow
recompressing the file on output.
  The second case has been the state of affairs in the past and it's why
NTemacs has worked.  The first case is what cygwin gzip currently provides,
thus a minor difficulty.  As I mentioned in a previous post, the problem can
be easily remedied with some elisp or by simply copying gunzip.exe to
gzip.exe. Nevertheless I think it would be advisable to restore the gzip
distribution to what it was in the past, with gzip.exe being the executable
and gunzip.exe being the link.

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Jon Cast]

Nicholas Wourms <nwourms@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Sigh, as usual the emacs camp always misses the point.

``As usual ... always''.  Not simple or elegant.  Not relevant, but
neither are your comments.

> You use a shell for file operations

So `vi foo.gz' works why?

> and you use an editor for editing.

Right.  Not a viitor.  Not an emacsitor.  Those aren't even words!

> Why is there any need to muddle the two?  Vi is simple and elegant,

And is an actual editor.

> whereas emacs is well...

Not an editor.  It's a desktop environment under the delusion it's an
editor.  It's still a better editor (no ugly i/a/e/etc. just to type
in text) and desktop environment (M-x customize is the best thing I've
seen) than anything else out there.

> rather bloated

For a desktop environment?

> and not very elegant.

How can something be more elegant than Lisp?

> Would you use a chainsaw to cut a diamond?  I think not...

No.  But I wouldn't precariously balance said diamond between my
fore-finger and tongue, either.  I'd use a real tool to hold it.

> Cheers,
> Nicholas

Jon Cast

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Max Bowsher]

Robert Collins wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Max Bowsher" maxb@ukf.net
>
>> Never mind emacs - surely it makes more sense for gzip to be the
>> real file, and gunzip to be the symlink? Isn't that what most people
>> would automatically assume?
>
> I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real
> file?

Ah - you want a reason :-). Dunno, it just felt better.

But David Robinow came up with a good one - if gzip.exe is a symlink, then there
is no way to invoke gzip in compression mode from a non cygwin program. OK, its
not that important, but since the fix is trivial...

Max.


--
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/

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robert Collins]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com 
> [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf Of Robinow, David
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 July 2002 7:30 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gzip.exe as symlink...
> 
> 
> > From: Nicholas Wourms [mailto:nwourms@yahoo.com]
> > Subject: RE: gzip.exe as symlink...
> > Sigh, as usual the emacs camp always misses the point.  You 
> > use a shell
> > for file operations and you use an editor for editing.  Why 
> > is there any
> > need to muddle the two?  Vi is simple and elegant, whereas emacs is
> > well...  rather bloated and not very elegant.  Would you use 
> > a chainsaw to
> > cut a diamond?  I think not...
>   I may very well be missing the point. But I'm starting to 
> believe that
> "vi" is incapable of opening compressed files and that you 
> think this is an
> advantage.  I think I'll continue to miss that point.
>   Well, emacs can open compressed files and some people like 
> that feature.
> In any case, the use of that feature is what this whole 
> thread is about.

Vim opens compressed files very nicely on linux, if it doesn't on cygwin
I'd ask the maintainer nicely, or even look into it myself.

Rob


--
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/

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robinow, David]

> From: Nicholas Wourms [mailto:nwourms@yahoo.com]
> Subject: RE: gzip.exe as symlink...
> Sigh, as usual the emacs camp always misses the point.  You 
> use a shell
> for file operations and you use an editor for editing.  Why 
> is there any
> need to muddle the two?  Vi is simple and elegant, whereas emacs is
> well...  rather bloated and not very elegant.  Would you use 
> a chainsaw to
> cut a diamond?  I think not...
  I may very well be missing the point. But I'm starting to believe that
"vi" is incapable of opening compressed files and that you think this is an
advantage.  I think I'll continue to miss that point.
  Well, emacs can open compressed files and some people like that feature.
In any case, the use of that feature is what this whole thread is about.

--
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/

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robert Collins]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com 
> [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf Of Jon Cast
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 July 2002 4:22 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: gzip.exe as symlink...
> 
> 
> Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
> <snip>
> > I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real
> > file?
> 
> If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.

Then they presumably have the luxry of telling it what .exe to run. 

Rob


--
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/

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Nicholas Wourms]

--- "Robinow, David" <drobinow@dayton.adroit.com> wrote:
> > From: Nicholas Wourms [mailto:nwourms@yahoo.com]
> > Subject: Re: gzip.exe as symlink...
> > --- Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> wrote:
> > > Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the
> real
> > > > file?
> > > 
> > > If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.
> > You should be using vi & bash, then you wouldn't have all 
> > these "issues".
>  bash has nothing to do with this issue.  Use of "vi" will have the same
> issue as "emacs". i.e., unless you use a cygwin version it will not
> recognize cygwin links.  Some people like to use NTEmacs because it has
> some
> features not available in cygwin XEmacs.  I don't know if there's an
> NTvi
> with features not present in cygwin vi -- I've never used vi.  In fact
> I've
> never met anybody who's used vi more than casually, although I hear it's
> popular in some circles.
>  In any case there's no need to learn an obscure editor just to read
> compressed files.   (setq jka-compr-use-shell t)  will force the
> compression
> code to use a shell (defaults to "sh") instead of "call-process". Use of
> a
> cygwin shell is of course required.
>  One could also dispense with the use of links altogether. gzip.exe is
> only
> 60K.

Sigh, as usual the emacs camp always misses the point.  You use a shell
for file operations and you use an editor for editing.  Why is there any
need to muddle the two?  Vi is simple and elegant, whereas emacs is
well...  rather bloated and not very elegant.  Would you use a chainsaw to
cut a diamond?  I think not...

Cheers,
Nicholas


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

--
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/

RE: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robinow, David]

> From: Nicholas Wourms [mailto:nwourms@yahoo.com]
> Subject: Re: gzip.exe as symlink...
> --- Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> wrote:
> > Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real
> > > file?
> > 
> > If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.
> You should be using vi & bash, then you wouldn't have all 
> these "issues".
 bash has nothing to do with this issue.  Use of "vi" will have the same
issue as "emacs". i.e., unless you use a cygwin version it will not
recognize cygwin links.  Some people like to use NTEmacs because it has some
features not available in cygwin XEmacs.  I don't know if there's an NTvi
with features not present in cygwin vi -- I've never used vi.  In fact I've
never met anybody who's used vi more than casually, although I hear it's
popular in some circles.
 In any case there's no need to learn an obscure editor just to read
compressed files.   (setq jka-compr-use-shell t)  will force the compression
code to use a shell (defaults to "sh") instead of "call-process". Use of a
cygwin shell is of course required.
 One could also dispense with the use of links altogether. gzip.exe is only
60K.

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Nicholas Wourms]

--- Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> wrote:
> Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
> <snip>
> > I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real
> > file?
> 
> If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.
> 
> > Rob
> 
You should be using vi & bash, then you wouldn't have all these "issues".

'Nuff said

Cheers,
Nicholas

P.S. - I couldn't resist :-P

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Jon Cast]

Robert Collins <robert.collins@syncretize.net> wrote:
<snip>
> I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real
> file?

If they have to use any program not linked with cygwin1.dll.

> Rob

Jon Cast

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Dario Alcocer]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 10:26:53AM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
> Never mind emacs - surely it makes more sense for gzip to be the real file, and
> gunzip to be the symlink? Isn't that what most people would automatically
> assume?

Yes.  I'd say that this qualifies as packaging bug.

OTOH, I agree with Rob that the NTemacs package in question is
probably broken also.

-- 
Dario Alcocer -- Sr. Software Developer, Helix Digital Inc.
alcocer@helixdigital.com -- http://www.helixdigital.com

--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb@ukf.net>
To: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: gzip.exe as symlink...


> Never mind emacs - surely it makes more sense for gzip to be the real
file, and
> gunzip to be the symlink? Isn't that what most people would automatically
> assume?

I'd never thought about it - why would anyone care which is the real file?

Rob


--
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/

Re: gzip.exe as symlink...

[Max Bowsher]

Never mind emacs - surely it makes more sense for gzip to be the real file, and
gunzip to be the symlink? Isn't that what most people would automatically
assume?


Max.


--
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/