setup package format v. rpm, reasoning?

Christopher Faylor
Wed Feb 16 19:24:00 GMT 2005

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 04:36:29PM -0800, Linda W wrote:
>I can imagine during the early development of cygwin, the rpm
>package types were rather "unsupportable" -- especially on a
>"first install", since no unix shell or coreutils are available.
>However, after the basic support is installed, what was the reasoning
>for keeping packages in YAPM (YetAnotherPackageManager).
>It seems even a bit more surprising considering Cygwin's early
>roots coming from a RedHat...

Cygwin's early roots did not come from Red Hat.  They came from
Cygnus.  That's what the "Cyg" stands for.


Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list