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/
|\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|,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/
