On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 07:50:48AM +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 01:26:15PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> ...
>
>If I may, speaking on behalf of some of the less-technical Cygwin users,
>some points:
>
>Obviously for simple .tar.bz2 files without any dependencies or post-
>install scripts, etc, untarring would appear to users to be a harmless
>thing to do.
Maybe a new naming convention might serve to deter the naive:
PackageName-versionOrDateTag.car ("Cygwin ARchive"). It would still be
a BZip2-compressed TAR file, just as Java's ".jar" files are PKZIP
files under a different name (and with some extra content structuring
conventions).If you are a nontechnical cygwin user, then why would you be making
any determination of what is harmless or not harmless? I would think
that it would be the reverse -- people who really know what they're
doing (or think they know what they're doing) would be untarring.
>I suspect people aren't reading the notes near the bottom of
>http://www.cygwin.com/download.html, or if they are, they don't believe
>what they read, notably the "Installing Cygwin using this method [untar]
>is not recommended." bit, because there's no explanation as to why
>it's not recommended.
...
cgf