public inbox for cygwin@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RE: name: GNU/Cygwin system
@ 2002-05-17  2:06 Robert Collins
  2002-05-17  2:26 ` Michael Smith
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Robert Collins @ 2002-05-17  2:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Michael Smith, cygwin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Smith [mailto:smith@xml-doc.org] 
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:37 PM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: name: GNU/Cygwin system
> 
> 
> I'm not trolling (and maybe for all I know, this has already 
> been talked out) but I wanted to suggest that it might be 
> appropriate for Cygwin to describe and advertise itself as 
> the "GNU/Cygwin system", giving credit where credit it very 
> much due -- just as Debian does by describing itself as a 
> "GNU/Linux" system.

It has been. See the list archives - and then you would have known.
 
> IMO, the fact the GNU system (not the Linux kernel) is really 
> the essential ingredient is pointed to by the fact that many 
> of the same concerns that affect maintainers of the various 
> Linux distros (and especially, maintainers of packages on 
> those distros) also very much affect Cygwin maintainers and packagers.

Yes, I can really see how some of the early packages like openssl owe so
much to the FSF. Don't get me wrong, I've signed copyright assigment for
various project contributions to the FSF and nearly always code under
the GPL. However, the manpower put in my the volunteers here is
certainly a much more important contribution than the existence of the
software itself. 

Firstly, one can, starting with a linux system, generate a windows
system will ALL of the proffered binaries. Thus the actual value added
of the software's existence is minimal. Iy's the maintainer time that
adds all the value to end users by offering binaries.
Secondly, GNU is already in the name: Gnu + Cygnus + Windows = Cygwin is
the logo on the website. Calling it GNU/Cygwin would be redundant.
Thirdly, If we where to look at adding things to the name, I'd be
strongly pushing for cgf/djd/cv/ed/rc/lh/eb/jt/Cygwin. And more could be
added there quite reasonably.

> For example, it seems like representatives from Cygwin should 
> be involved with the Linux Standard Base effort:
> 
>  http://www.linuxbase.org/

That would be nice. I don't know of anyone here with the time. Would you
like to be such a liason?

>And the effort should be called "GNU Standard Base" instead 
> (though I realize that's not s ever actually going to happen).

I disagree here. It's quite feasible to put the BSD cp/tar/mv etc onto a
linux kernel based system, and the LSB should still apply. Likewise the
LSB should still apply to a GNU/Hurd kernel based machine, so I do agree
that the name LSB is wrong - just not with your replacement. Something
like the Unix Standard Base would be appropriate, with
IBM/HP/SUN/QNX/BSD folk also involved.

At this point, I've gone offtopic, so I'll just be quite now :}

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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: name: GNU/cygwin system
@ 2002-05-22 14:27 Kilroy, David
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Kilroy, David @ 2002-05-22 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'cygwin@cygwin.com', zhlg_shuhan

The file /etc/passwd needs to be properly created.

Type 'man mkpasswd' for better directions than I can give, and search for
mkpasswd in the mailing lists. Also
http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/using-utils.html

If that doesn't work, change the environment variable PS1 to something less
alarming :)

Question to everyone else: Should setup attempt to run mkpasswd as part of
the postinstall of cygwin (or any of the shells)? Or at least get a mention
in the FAQ? It was a while before I realised this for myself.

Dave.

> zhlg_shuhan wrote:
> >      I know to you through  cygwin mail list.I am a 
> beginner of cygwin,so many problems occur when I use it.for example:
> >  bash always alarms at beginning of new command line:
> >   "I have no name!@HZ_RD_ZHANGL ~
> >     $_
> > 
> >   "
> >   I want "useradd" command but failed for lack of useradd command.
> >   how can I name it?
> > 
> > tks.&regards                              
> >                                                     zhangliang
> > 


--
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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20020522065446.18919.qmail@sina.com>]
* RE: name: GNU/cygwin system
@ 2002-05-21 20:22 Robb, Sam
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Robb, Sam @ 2002-05-21 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin

> I don't disagree with your conclusion, Chris, but you're 
> using a flawed 
> model.  So *what* if cygwin is the most popular project on 
> sources.redhat?

Just for the record: any number of "unix + windows" related
searches ("bash for windows", "gnu for windows", "unix for
windows", "gcc for windows", "free windows compiler", etc.)
turn up the Cygwin home in the top ten links (in most of my
examples, as the #1 link.)

At my previous company - with many hardcore Windows software
folks - I think that just about everyone had at least heard
of Cygwin, and a majority of us had used it at one point or
another (either at work, at home, or both.)  Keep in mind,
this was in Pittsburgh, PA - not Silicon Valley, Boston, or
any other traditional hotbed of cutting-edge technology.

Anecdotal evidence, perhaps.  But I honestly don't think that
Cygwin has any kind of visibility problem.

-Samrobb

--
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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: name: GNU/cygwin system
@ 2002-05-21 11:00 Robert Collins
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Robert Collins @ 2002-05-21 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Michael Smith, cygwin



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Smith [mailto:smith@xml-doc.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 3:37 PM
 
> Anyway, though I think just about everybody who's got any familiarity
> with the free software world at all knows that Linux packages (RPMs
> and Debian packages) are available for all sorts of things, I'm not
> sure how many are aware that:
> 
>   * through Cygwin, many of the same tools available as packages for
>     Linux distributions are also available as packages for Windows
>     (and Cygwin provides an environment for compiling and installing
>     many others that aren't packaged yet)
> 
>   * Cygwin provides a sophisticated package management system that
>     makes it easy to install and update packages

One of the things is that Cygwin's package list is still pretty small.
On Debian  for instance, one can grab 3 or even 4 different IMAP
daemons. On Cygwin, you're lucky to get one. This is a maturity thing,
but still a significant difference. Don't get me wrong - we do
appreciate extra awareness of Cygwin - but there is a lot to do.

One of the most significant things you can do is maintain a package.
Just a single one. Then it's one more thing available for use on cygwin,
and one more community that becomes aware of us. The libxml/libxslt
community is aware of cygwin for instance - because as maintainer I am
present on the upstream lists.
 
> I don't what can be done to raise more awareness about Cygwin --
> especially about the availability of packages; but in part, I guess
> that more people should -- when, on mailing lists or websites, they're
> pointing out that certain applications are available as Linux
> packages -- take the time to check to see whether particular packages
> are available for Cygwin, and acknowledge when they are.

IMO the biggest awareness raiser is someone present in both the cygwin
and the upstream community who raises the presence of binary packages in
peoples awareness.
 
> That's what I've tried to do for the DocBook/XML/SGML packages that
> Jon Foster and Markus Hoenicka put together -- by adding information
> about them to the DocBook Wiki:

Cool. You might like to point out that in the near future those packages
will be available without needing the custom URL. They will be mirrored
globally.

> About the page at the second URL: I hope I'm not using the Cygwin logo
> inappropriately. If I am, somebody please let me know (I couldn't find
> any information at the Cygwin site about use of the logo).

That seems fine to me. I'm not aware of any strict policy about the
logo. Chris?

> Are there other promotional logos/buttons/banners I could/should use
> instead? Maybe a version of the Cygwin banner
(http://cygwin.com/cygwin.jpg)?

I think that the banner is a beter promotional tool. Words help!

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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* RE: name: GNU/Cygwin system
@ 2002-05-20 10:11 Peter Ring
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Peter Ring @ 2002-05-20 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin

LSB is not just about binary compatibility; it's also about 
file hierarchies, configuration mechanisms, and utilities 
for installation and maintenance.

I'd like to bring attention to standardisation of XML
resources.

Some packages are more or less architecture-independent, 
e.g., TeX/LaTeX formats and SGML/XML DTDs. Keeping in line 
with LSB minimizes the porting effort. While there's an 
established way to handle TeX resources, things are not 
quite sorted out for SGML/XML. A proposed standard for 
installation and maintenance of SGML resources [1] didn't 
make it into the LSB 1.1. The standardisation effort was 
recently restarted [2]. 

XML and data- and transaction-oriented applications must 
now be taken into consideration; the original proposal 
was strictly SGML-and-document oriented (and focused 
rather narrowly on DocBook). This has been discussed and 
is, to the best of my knowledge, acknowledged.

Just as XML is not just about documents, it's also rather 
promiscuous about platforms. Java is very important in 
this respect, but Cygwin might also play a role here. 
Cygwin seems to be popular with some of the XML hot-shots 
when they for some reason or another have to work on 
Win32 boxes. 

I'm afraid I can't offer much more -- except that I think 
we should continue discussing such matters here and on 
the cygwin-apps list.

kind regards
Peter Ring


[1] http://people.debian.org/~mrj/lsb-sgmlspec_cvs20020308/index.html
[2] https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/lsb-xml-sgml

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson@ece.gatech.edu]
Sent: 17. maj 2002 18:49
To: Michael Smith
Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: name: GNU/Cygwin system


<snip />

To tell you the truth, I don't see there being much hope -- or reason 
for -- the LSB to take cygwin into account.  Thanks to various 
microsoftisms, we're too weird.  Non-ELF shared libraries split into 
"runtime" and "linktime" pieces.  Runtime loader works completely 
differently than ld.so, so library versioning is handled completely 
differently.  Then, we have two different windowing systems..."native" 
and "X" which must coexist.  The best I can see is for cygwin to take 
what LSB does, and try to follow it as best we can while making 
allowances for the uniqueness of the platform.  We are the best ones to 
judge where those allowances must be made -- not them.  While the linux 
distributors can (eventually) reach a compromise position that all linux 
distributions can follow, there is no "compromise" here -- they'd have 
to put "special case exceptions" in their document specifically for 
cygwin.  But there's no need to uglify the LSB with all that:

What is the main purpose of the LSB?  Binary interoperability, so that 
third party software vendors can ship ONE package that is guaranteed to 
work on every LSB-compliant Linux platform.  Doesn't really apply to 
cygwin...and oh, yeah, how does RMS feel about making life easier for 
proprietary (possibly closed source) vendors?  Would he want the name 
GNU associated with THAT?

<snip />

--
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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* name: GNU/Cygwin system
@ 2002-05-17  1:40 Michael Smith
  2002-05-17 11:02 ` Charles Wilson
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Michael Smith @ 2002-05-17  1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin

I'm not trolling (and maybe for all I know, this has already been
talked out) but I wanted to suggest that it might be appropriate for
Cygwin to describe and advertise itself as the "GNU/Cygwin system",
giving credit where credit it very much due -- just as Debian does by
describing itself as a "GNU/Linux" system.

IMO, the fact the GNU system (not the Linux kernel) is really the
essential ingredient is pointed to by the fact that many of the same
concerns that affect maintainers of the various Linux distros (and
especially, maintainers of packages on those distros) also very much
affect Cygwin maintainers and packagers.

For example, it seems like representatives from Cygwin should be
involved with the Linux Standard Base effort:

  http://www.linuxbase.org/

And the effort should be called "GNU Standard Base" instead (though I
realize that's not s ever actually going to happen).

  --Mike Smith


-- 
Michael Smith, Tokyo, Japan    http://sideshowbarker.net
&#x30DE;&#x30A4;&#x30AF;

Just as there are four letters in the name of God, there are four seasons. This 
is because of THE LAW OF PSYCHIC EQUIVALENCE. the law of psychic equivalence is 
encoded in the Bible. ALL modern problems stem from the failure to recognise 
God's law of electro-atomic-universal compensation.

                               http://www.logopoeia.com/wisdom/




--
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/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2002-05-22 18:36 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-05-17  2:06 name: GNU/Cygwin system Robert Collins
2002-05-17  2:26 ` Michael Smith
2002-05-17 10:44   ` name: GNU/cygwin system Christopher Faylor
2002-05-21  8:40     ` Michael Smith
2002-05-21 10:15       ` Christopher Faylor
2002-05-21 17:29         ` Charles Wilson
2002-05-21 17:57           ` Charles Wilson
2002-05-22  4:49           ` Gary R. Van Sickle
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-22 14:27 Kilroy, David
     [not found] <20020522065446.18919.qmail@sina.com>
2002-05-22 14:23 ` Charles Wilson
2002-05-21 20:22 Robb, Sam
2002-05-21 11:00 Robert Collins
2002-05-20 10:11 name: GNU/Cygwin system Peter Ring
2002-05-17  1:40 Michael Smith
2002-05-17 11:02 ` Charles Wilson

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).