Guy Harris wrote:
Dave Ramsey wrote:
I have re-read the tools section very carefully, and Cygwin is only
mentioned as an alternative to Native Win32 ... I can't see where Cygwin
is
specified as a mandatory tool to build under Native Win32 environment,
although it IS late and I'm tired :)
The Win32: Recommended Tools section of the Developer's Guide needs to be
changed to say that you need Cygwin *even for Win32 native builds*, as
bash is required and you only get it with Cygwin.
Will this story ever end?
When I was writing the first version of the doc, I was only mentioning
the cygwin part.
Then some people were whining that they use the native Win32 tools and
it's much faster to work with and so on.
I added the native version descriptions.
The next time another one was whining: "I tried the native builds and it
didn't worked"
So I added a *bold note* "*Unless you know exactly what you are doing,
you should strictly following the recommendations!"*
But it seems to be common sense to ignore this note?!?
I know how this will continue:
I'm writing "bash is required from cygwin so you need to get cygwin".
So the next one will come and say: "but I'm using bash from the Gnuwin
project and it's just working fine".
And so the story will continue until doomsday ...
It seems to be common sense to read a small part of the doc and then
say: "but that doesn't work".
So actually I'm deeply tired to write that stuff so each and every lazy
person in the world is getting the point without actually reading the
guide at all.
I think I'm not going to continue working on the developer's guide, may
someone else continue this cumbersome and depressing work ...
Regards, ULFL
P.S: It also seems to be common sense to criticize the documentation
without doing anything to improve it. Documentation seems to be a "job
done by someone else". I''m going to follow this trail by the things I'm
going to do in the future. Let someone else do the user documentation ...
