Hello! That comment about Cygwin is decidedly not true. The collection is unstable as designed. It is an evolving collection of ports based within reason on the same framework we have on Linux, and yes on the BSD family. The big problem is what it's sitting on, and that's why it is a moving target. The groups behind it are continuing to update and revise the compatibility layer behind it.
I am afraid it will continue to be unstable as it continues to be evolving. I should also add that the people behind my distribution do not like git much either, however but they also include it. I've used it a few times. I also do not like it much either. I also have ambivalent feelings behind SVN and CVS. Both have their good points and their bad points. Bazaar and mercurial I am not at all fond of. -- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Force will be with you always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:grub-devel- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vesa Jääskeläinen > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 1:30 PM > To: The development of GRUB 2 > Subject: Re: Switching to git? > > Otavio Salvador wrote: > > "Yoshinori K. Okuji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Ok, now about the git. As TomC!E! pointed out, the lack of portability is > >> regression from CVS. If you think, for example, grub4dos is important, why > >> can you choose git? > > > > Agree on that too. > > > > It's not that bad[1] and users can use git with cygwin or via git-cvspserver. > > > > 1. http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/WindowsInstall > > Just leave cygwin out of the box... thank you! > > cygwin is one of the worst pieces of software that just does not work > correctly. In my point-of-view portability means that you can use > software natively on some platform and it does not include installing > emulators or such to run software (like cygwin, wine). _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
