This is the mail archive of the cygwin@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: idea for a new project, libntcmd


On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:

> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 03:09:43PM -0800, Rafael Kitover wrote:
> > >>Really?  Or would it simply delay them learning the knowledge to
> > >>function in an environment that does not make specific allowances for
> > >>them?
> > >
> > >Well, the goal would be for new cygwin users, who often have little
> > >knowledge of UNIX, to have more space to get comfortable in learning
> > >the environment.
> >
> > I would challenge the assertion that new cygwin users often have little
> > knowledge of UNIX.  Vocal people on this mailing list do make this
> > assertion from time to time but there is no hard data to support that
> > claim.
>
> I came to Cygwin so many years ago with little knowledge of UNIX.  And I'm so
> hard you could bounce quarters off my abs ;-).
>
> > In absence of hard data, I am (perhaps naively) sticking with the
> > assumption that the core goal for the project of providing UNIX
> > emulation for Windows for people who want UNIX tools, is still valid.
> >
>
> Sure it is, but just because people want UNIX tools on Windows, that doesn't
> mean they know much about them.  In my case, I wanted UNIX tools because the
> native Windows ones were so pathetic, and I knew (via conversations with others,
> reading some docs, etc etc) that, say, GNU make wiped the floor with MS's nmake.
> And it's of course common knowledge that command.com and cmd.exe are exactly
> worthless compared to even the weakest of UNIXoid shells.  But I certainly knew
> little about how to actually get the most out of them until well after I had
> first installed Cygwin.
>
> > I guess it's remotely possible that someone would want UNIX tools
> > because they're interested in UNIX but don't know anything about it.  If
> > that is the case, then (as I think has already been mentioned) offering
> > them Windows commands or, especially, paths doesn't sound like it would
> > be doing them any favors.
>
> Having been one of those remotely possible people, I have to agree.  For paths
> there's cygpath; for "dir" etc, cut command.com loose.  Throw the bathwater out
> with that baby, step up to the UNIX plate, and don't look back lest ye be turned
> into a pillow of salt.  It's better here.

I have to agree with the majority opinion for this thread: a cmd.exe clone
under Cygwin would not really be useful for Unix newbies.  Making it
easier to use old tools has never hastened the transition to new ones.  If
anything, a more useful tool would be a bat2sh translator. :-D

The only advantage I can see in the proposed package over the vanilla
cmd.exe is that it could be made tty-aware (but even that is questionable,
and only useful if one is invoking Cygwin programs from batch files -- and
why would one want to do *that*?).
	Igor
P.S. A special note to Gary: "a *pillow* of salt"? ;-)
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

Oh, boy, virtual memory! Now I'm gonna make myself a really *big* RAMdisk!
  -- /usr/games/fortune


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]