This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: multiple cygwin installs
- From: Reini Urban <rurban at x-ray dot at>
- To: cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:21:48 +0200
- Subject: Re: multiple cygwin installs
- References: <F0D7281DAB048B438E8F5EC4ECEFBDDC014D0BEC@esmail.elsag.de> <20070329122137.GB27202@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
Christopher Faylor schrieb:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:11:40PM +0200, J?rg Schaible wrote:
Phil Betts wrote on Thursday, March 29, 2007 1:34 PM:
Any 3PP that forces one to use their (inevitably out of date) version
of cygwin (and thereby killing the official installation) is IMO broken
and the issue should be taken up with them. At the very least, it
shows they have such little faith in their own software's robustness
that they won't risk it running on an newer version of cygwin.
Imagine the chaos if ALL software was installed like this. You might
end up with 100 different versions of cygwin on your PC, and ProductA
would never be able to talk to ProductB because they'd need two
different sets of registry settings simultaneously.
I'm sure their justification is that they are reducing support costs by
ensuring it's running on a known platform. Only if their customer
support is forced to resolve the problems caused by their installation
will they learn that this is a false economy.
Well, the soapbox is coming true. Or why do you think so much
companies start to deliver their app in a VM? Never trust an OS
installed by a stranger ... hehehe
This is probably cygwin-talk material (Reply-To set) but is that really
true? Are companies really packaging products with their own VM?
But we do business for Formula 1 and we don't want customers destroy
real-time capabilities by installing spy-ware, certain virus checkers or
defraggers and bother our support department. The customers equipment is