[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Building Emacs-cvs on Cygwin

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Building Emacs-cvs on Cygwin
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:12:03 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
>> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:24:40 +0200
>> Cc: address@hidden
>> Microsoft Windows is not a complete system, as it is missing most
>> end user applications, and is also lacking the toolbox inventory of
>> small utilities that are a necessary ingredient of POSIX systems.
> What exactly is missing that makes you say this?
> A bare-bones Linux kernel

Which neither Richard nor I was talking about.  Richard was clearly
talking about a GNU/Linux system, and so was I.  And Richard called a
GNU/Linux system comparable to MS Windows, and I said that MS Windows
did not compare well at all in that regard.

So I don't know what straw men you are trying to beat here.

> lacks even a shell and basic commands like ls and cp, which are all
> GNU programs, but MS-Windows does come with the equivalents of these
> commands out of the box.

But the MS Windows versions of even those primitive commands are much
less useful, particular in scripts, than the GNU equivalents.

>> One has to add quite a bit of GNU stuff to MS Windows before it
>> becomes comparably useful.
> ``Useful'' is in the eyes of the beholder.  ``Usable'' is a more
> relevant issue: stripped of all GNU programs, a Linux-based system
> is simply unusable, IMO.

So what?  Richard was not talking about just a kernel, I was not
talking about just a kernel.

What is your fixation with a bare Linux kernel?

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]