[CentOS-devel] Ja oder nein: is cygwin-setup process a viable alternative to present day builds?

Sat Feb 19 03:01:33 UTC 2011
Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 16:15, Larry Vaden <vaden at texoma.net> wrote:
> This question keys off IIRC Johnny's remarks earlier in the day about
> how much work it is to build a release.
> This question is addressed to those build gurus on this list who have
> forgotten more about the build process than this poster will ever know
> and further have first hand knowledge|experience with cygwin-setup.
> At the end of the day, other than RPM package management, what are the
> substantial differences that would preclude a cygwin-setup-like build
> process from being used to build and maintain the release and would it
> be a lot faster and less labor intensive?

1) Cygwin doesn't install a system. Windows has done all that for you.
[Anaconda and its ilk does that and has to played with to make sure it
2) Cygwin's package control is much simpler than RPM from my long ago
talking with cygwin developers. Again because a lot of stuff is
provided by either Windows or not needed.
3) As far as I know Cygwin doesn't build locally. Stuff is built
'somewhere else' and then cygwin-setup downloads the archives, unpacks
them, and installs it into \cygwin.

Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren