If you read the cygwin-patches list, this message might look familiar. (Does anyone know of a package that corrects conceptual errors? :) Inspired by the recent call for contributors (http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2001-02/msg01512.html), I contacted Pierre A. Humblet, who maintains a Cygwin binary of ispell: ftp://ftp.franken.de/pub/win32/develop/gnuwin32/cygwin/porters/Humblet_Pierre_A He kindly gave me the go-ahead to contribute an "official" ispell package, but expressed the following: > The things that have kept me back from offering it are: > a) the Franken site is already well known and the ispell site points > to it, so users should have no problem finding it. > b) Cygnus does not have a good mechanism to specify optional > packages and I already feel burdened having to upload > optional packages I could do without (turning them off > each time I upload is a pain). Thus I don't want > to impose ispell on others. > c) What dictionaries to include ? (with impact on b)) Given that Cygwin is fairly English-centric at the moment, I plan on packaging only the American and British dictionaries. I wonder what will happen when someone offers a German or Spanish or ... package? In the meantime, I am starting on the instructions for building a cygwin package (http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2000-11/msg00055.html). Is the /usr versus /usr/local a hard and fast rule? I am also looking into the aspell/pspell package as suggested by Jason Tishler. Jon
