cygwin-mount.el (Was Re: Using GDB in NTEMACS)

[Jari Aalto+mail.emacs]

* 2002-02-22 Jason Rumney <address@hidden> list.emacs-devel
* Message-Id: <address@hidden>
| "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/address@hidden> writes:
| 
| > And on top of that, we can easily do something about it by including
| > something like cygwin-mount.el.
| 
| The problem with doing that IMHO, is that if Emacs supports Cygwin
| paths in the 99% of cases that cygwin-mount.el covers, users will
| expect Cygwin paths to work in 100% of cases.  

I'm not sure they will. Perhaps only you want 100% correctness?

I have never wanted anything more that what cygwin-mount.el provides
and I have used Cygwin for a very long time. 

Maybe there is a misunderstanding what cygwin + Emacs users want. In
my understanding (just go to Windows Emacs mailing list), they are not
interested in full 100% compatibility in Emacs lisp function level,
they just want tighter co-operation.

And that's what is offered by cygwin-mount.el

The ambitious goal could be 100%, but who needs it?
If there is no need for it, why set a goal to 100%. I would't.

| Until someone can
| spend the time to make Cygwin paths work in the remaining 1% of
| cases, it is better that cygwin-mount.el remains external to Emacs,
| so that expectation is not there.

That's sad. Very sad. With this statement you all Windows users
continue complaining why Emacs does not help them to use Cygwin
environment more easily. They keep asking why Emacs still holds more
to it's "ideals" and does not answer to what users really need.

I think it is evident enough by now that they want tighter Cygwin 
co-operation. We should provide that, and not hold on to 100% goals
that are not needed by users.

Jari

-- 
http://tiny-tools.sourceforge.net/
Swatch  @time http://www.ryanthiessen.com/swatch/resources.htm
Convert @time http://www.mir.com.my/iTime/itime.htm