Public Domain Python

[Charles Hixson]

Windows ISN'T as standardized as one would expect.  OTOH, CygWin isn't Linux,
either.  I have CygWin installed and configured on my Win95 box.  Sometimes I use
the tools, but if I really want to use them, then I switch over to Linux, use the
tools, and, if I need to, port the result back to Windows.  It's a LOT better and
nothing, but it's a LOT less than Linux.  It isn't just that some of the folk who
try to use it aren't Linux literate.  Things keep breaking in strange places.
(Well, and, of course, Win95 isn't one of the supported platforms.  I'd need to
switch to WinNT.  Not likely, when what I'm trying to do is switch to Linux.
Switching to WinNT would guarantee that I wouldn't be allowed to switch to Linux.)

Grant Edwards wrote:

> In article <8ptmpb$1p4j at drn.newsguy.com>, Grant Griffin wrote:
>
> >But the fact that someone who is experienced in that stuff
> >needed two weeks to do it suggests that those of us who aren't
> >particularly Unix-literate and aren't particularly GNU-literate
> >(config.in, etc.) don't stand a chance.
>
> It would be pretty tough for a non-Unix user.
>
> Since I already knew how to do the configure/build stuff, and
> new to watch for CR/LF problems, it wasn't too bad.  I did have
> to chase down some target-specific bugs in gdb/insight.
>
> The problems are mostly caused by the fact that you're trying
> to use Unix tools under a non-Unix OS (despite Bill's claim
> that NT is "more Unix than Unix" or whatever it was he said).
> I presume that open-source projects that are native to Windows
> go a lot smoother.
>
> >Over the last few years, I've tried to get CygWin running
> >several times, usually wasting 1-2 days on each unsuccessful
> >attempt.  I've had some success installing the binaries, but I
> >haven't ever gotten very far in having it rebuild itself from
> >scratch.
>
> Even I didn't try that.  I did the binary install of Cygwin
> (which I had to do from a local directory -- I never got the
> network-based install to work).
>
> >But since Windows is a highly standardized system (it has to
> >be: otherwise it would never work to ship software as
> >binaries),
>
> Most of the people where I work do Win32 applications and
> driver work.  Judging by their problems windows isn't as
> standardized as one would expect.
>
> >Good point.  For example, I think there's a GNU chess
> >program--but there isn't a GNU "Monopoly" program. <wink>
> >
> >(Which reminds me: isn't it about time for Stallman and his
> >friends to write one of those "Home Lawyer" programs?  ;-)
>
> They don't need to. All open-source developers are also amateur
> IP lawyers.  I once went out with a lawyer who practiced in the
> IP area. She was surprised that I knew anything at all about
> copyright and patent law -- I explained that software
> developers waste endless hours arguing about IP law.  A few of
> them (generally not me) even know what they're talking about.
>
> >Yup.  I think the moral of the story here is "Software
> >'freedom' is mostly for the elite." ;-)
>
> Historically, nobody gives you freedom -- those who want it
> have to take it.  In the software world, you don't have to
> fight and die for it, but you do have to be willing and able to
> write software.  Groups who don't/won't/can't write software
> are never free except at the pleasure of others.
>
> --
> Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  It's today's SPECIAL!
>                                   at
>                                visi.com

-- (c) Charles Hixson
--  Addition of advertisements or hyperlinks to products specifically prohibited

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: charleshixsn.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 153 bytes
Desc: Card for Charles Hixson
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20000915/4c25aead/attachment.vcf>