On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 08:53:11AM -0500, Weiqi Gao wrote: >On 8/7/05, Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Just in case it matters, unless Corinna disagrees, we won't be changing >> the name to something other than setup.exe. > >Thank you, thank you, thank you. Stick with setup.exe! There are >probably tens of thousands of little scripts written that does >something like: > >wget -c http://cygwin.com/setup.exe && ./setup.exe > >Changing the name will force all of them to revise the scripts---for >no apparent gain!
Exactly. >>The notion that changing the name to something else will make users >>understand how to use setup.exe is not one that I adhere to. > >Whatever you change the name to, there will be people complaining. And >remember, the users of Cygwin are those who want to use things like >tr(1), cat(1), awk(1), gcc(1), or even perl(1). Surely they understand >things like the file systems, directory structures, and the naming of >executables. Sadly, given the traffic here, I think a lot of people who want to use Cygwin are not really clear on how to use these types of things. However, in that vein, everyone has managed to find their way here despite the fact that the name "Cygwin" does not in any way invoke the concept of "linux emulation for windows". The name "setup.exe" at least has *some* meaning in the context of what it does. cgf -- 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/
