Re: Subversion

Austin Ziegler wrote:

>There is a fundamental disconnect between the usability of cygwin and
>Windows. When you have to think in a different filesystem on the same
>computer, there's no measure of utilitarianism there. It's all about
>lazyness instead.
>

No, it's all about supporting the running of code that assumes a Unix 
(POSIX) filesystem, by providing a standard Unix filesystem that maps 
onto the Windows filesystem.

Since Windows is the only mainstream OS that expects multiple filesystem 
trees, one per drive, this inevitably involves coming up with a way to 
access those multiple trees. If you don't like the approach of 
pretending they're mounted in the one Unix tree via the usual Unix 
mechanism, what would you suggest instead?

Of course, if you work on one drive, you don't need to care about any of 
that anyway. You're free to have the Unix filesystem in Cygwin match the 
Windows C: filesystem, and cd /windows/system or cd "/Documents and 
Settings/Administrator" or whatever--exactly the same filesystem.

The reason Cygwin suggests not doing that by default, is precisely to 
ensure that all of Cygwin's files are under a single directory, keeping 
it isolated from the Windows system directories and easy to remove. But 
hey, it's your choice, if needing to "think in a different filesystem" 
is that hard for you, go ahead and install the other way.

So, any other *functional* objections to Cygwin, or was that it?


mathew