Le Jeudi 9 Mai 2002 02:20, John Ineson a écrit : > What you're setting out here is interesting, but is a bit different from > what was previously envisioned. The initial design was probably more > Debian/Cygwin than Debian/w32, but people have mentioned LINE too. > By making Cygwin optional I personally suspect you'd break an > unmanageable number of things, without really gaining much, BICBW.
There are a number of excellent Windows native software and I don't see the reason why we should re-compile them under Cygwin. Always using Cygwin would mess-up the user with three versions: - Native Windows from the vendor website, - Cygwin from Cygwin website, - W32/GNU here. Instead, we could offer the best of both worlds using a single-stop W32/Debian super-installer : 1) Windows native dpkg, 2) Cygwin dll package, 3) Windows native packages : - Apache + PHP, - Python, - CVS, - diff, - WinCVS, - openoffice, - perl, - dev-C++, - Cygwin. 4) Cygwin dependant packages : - Gnome, - KDE, - PostgreSQL. Technical issues for offering solutions from both worlds: - path compatibility (which should be Unix style everywhere as stated in the Debian charter. This will be the only visible change for native Windows users), - we need a tools that can write/update the Windows registry, - we probably need an installation macro language layer (like fink http://fink.sourceforge.net). - and a good GUI that would convince users ... Cheers, Jean-Michel POURE -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
