RPM's require to much knowledge of setup to port easily
Larry Hall (Cygwin)
Mon Jun 12 23:14:00 GMT 2006
On 06/12/2006, Linda Walsh wrote:
> >> I still don't get all the reasons behind forcing everyone into a
> >> new format. Is it just a power trip or what?
> > Actually, the "new" (i.e., five+ year old) format was imposed on us by
> > the Trilateral Commission.
> Ah, but you avoided answering the question. Why did the cygwin
> project go with another package format? It can't be because
> rpm doesn't run natively under Win -- since when installing
> system for the first time, a non-rpm setup & install process
> is used. "Rpm" is used after the basic packages are loaded.
Ah, the lack of a Windows RPM port was *exactly* the reason
setup.exe was created. The simplest way to port RPM was to use
Cygwin, which then leads to a chicken/egg problem. In all honesty
though, if you really would like to know the details of the decision-
making process that made the install process what it is today, you
can find it all in the cygwin-apps email archives. You'll have to
go back quite a ways to find it's beginnings though.
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin