Re: Distributing Cygwin-based software

[Jani Tiainen <redetin at luukku dot com>]

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, Soeren Nils Kuklau wrote:
>
>
> > Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, Soeren Nils Kuklau wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > This is *not* the right list for discussing how to subvert the existing
> > >
> > > Cygwin installations on users' machines by distributing your own copy of
> > > cygwin1.dll (though this *has* been discussed in the past - search the
> > > list archives).
> >
> > Okay, but what /would/ be the right place? Since I don't think people
> > will be willing to install Cygwin just for being able to use a single
> > other piece of software...
>
>
> So try MinGW...
>
> > Think Gtk for Windows programs (such as Gaim): they come with the proper
> > frameworks included, so the user won't have to worry about that.
>
>
> So try MinGW...  See also <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#3PP>... :-)

MinGW works greatly... And take GIMP as an example. You need sparate GTK 
package installed. Just like many new .NET apps needs .NET Framework 
installed - separately. Just to use _single_ application. Why does this 
differ from installing Cygwin? Execpt other is enforced and offered by 
Microsoft other by bunch of maniacs... (No offence =)

> > > > At the same time, however, we do not want Windows-based users to
> > > > feel forced into Cygwin's behaviours.  We want to distribute a
> > > > Windows application - GPL'd, with some Unix-style quirks, and
> > > > compatible to the other major OS'es out there, but Windows
> > > > nevertheless.
> > >
> > > So maybe the MinGW project is more like what you're looking for, then.
> >
> > Indeed; we're looking into it.
>
>
> Be aware, though, that you won't get full POSIX functionality that Cygwin
> provides -- only those parts that are directly supported by the MSVC
> runtime.  In particular, you'll lose the ability to understand POSIX
> (Cygwin) filenames.

There also exists GnuWin32 libraries that has very, very _minimal_ set 
of POSIX functions to make many libraries and applications to work.

> > > > Those who truly want a full Unix experience wouldn't use Windows in
> > > > the first place, and thus not Cygwin either.
> > >
> > > This is not true at all (to put it mildly).  Those who want POSIX behavior
> > > on Windows *will* (and *do*) use Cygwin.  But this particular point is
> > > better <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TITTTL>ed.
> >
> > Right, but I wouldn't define "POSIX behaviour" as "full Unix experience" ;-)
>
>
> Hey, we're getting there -- see the efforts on porting Gnome to Cygwin...

Microsoft also offers "competitive" package, SFU that has, mainly libs 
for POSIX stuff. It doesn't contain all magnificent applications that 
Cygwin does, like X11 and SSH (which are great tools when used together.)

> > But yes, that's OT.
>
>
> Yep.  A perfect topic for the cygwin-talk list... ;-)

That list doesn't exists in GMane... =(

--

Jani Tiainen


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/