From:	Bernd DOT Schilpp AT brokat DOT de (Bernd Schilpp)
Subject:	Re: What about RSXNT instead of cygwin32???
14 Oct 1997 10:02:11 -0700 :
Message-ID:	<34432E80.9D7EA899.cygnus.gnu-win32@brokat.de>
References:	<3442267F DOT D80D15EE AT brokat DOT de>
Reply-To:	Bernd DOT Schilpp AT brokat DOT de
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	Peter Dalgaard BSA <p DOT dalgaard AT kubism DOT ku DOT dk>
Cc:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote:

> Yes, I've tried that and it certainly seems to be a class act,
> although not as ambitious as cygwin32. The most obvious difference is
> that there are no Unix utilities beyond 'make' coming with it. In
> particular, there's no shell, so configure scripts can't work. In
> contrast, cygwin32 is trying to reach a state where you can take Unix
> sources and just type "./configure; make".

Thank you for writing of your experience with RSXNT.
I agree with you, that it is very convenient, if you have a
development-environment - like
cygwin32 offers - where you can act just like in a unix-environment.
But my Problem is, that threads are very important for the purpose of my
Programs - so I need threadsave libaries. Does anybody know, when cygwin32
is going to have threadsave libaries ?

--
Greetings,
Bernd


-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".

- Raw text -