Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/02/08/06:18:02
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
> [mailto:cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com]On Behalf Of Mumit Khan
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:06 PM
> To: Cygwin
> Subject: Re: ksh93? -- also u/win question
>
>
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> > >I'm still working on it. I sort of lost interest though, now that zsh runs
> > >so smoothly under cygwin (no more status access violations, yay!).
>
> Regarding ksh93, it's actually not that hard to port to Cygwin, once you
> figure out AT&T's build system. I've been using AT&T sources for many
> years, since the initial days of cfront, so it doesn't look that foreign
> to me. I've been way too busy with real life, and just haven't had the
> time to tweak the various pieces yet (pathname handling, enhanced spawnv*
> style api for cygwin, without using UWIN specific code, to speed things up,
> etc). My shell scripts run under vendor ksh or bash, so I personally don't
> need it as much.
>
> > Can you give an example of some of the clever ideas in uwin? I know that
> > they have some sort of setuid daemon or something like that but it has been
> > a while since I really investigated U/WIN.
>
> Here's my take on this, and it's quite simple. A few years ago, when you
> wanted Unix on PC with the feel of Unix, you had 3 or 4 choices, and the
> prominent ones were Softway/Interix/now-Microsoft (which uses POSIX
> subsystem, so different beast altogether), Cygwin and UWIN. UWIN provided
> almost a real Unix feel right after you installed it, and that made a lot
> of users feel more comfortable than the old pre v1.0 Cygwin layout scheme.
> It also installed things like inetd etc right off the bat, and it just
> made things easier. There were also little things like handling of hard
> links and a few others.
>
> In terms of technology, UWIN's process management was certainly much
> faster (have not benchmarked against any recent Cygwin versions, so
> please don't ask me how it compares now), and I/O subsystem using sfio
> is *much* better. The system runtime uses AST library, which is also
> very well done. Newlib is perhaps a good choice for an embedded system,
> and while it's getting better, it still lacks of lot of features of a
> modern hosted C runtime. The newlib math library is, ah how should I put
> it, not that great. UWIN has the advantage of leveraging MSVC runtime,
> which has a decent fp math library.
Don't know if this is relevant but it is possible to compile
sfio-2000 under cygwin (not the threaded version of course)
and almost all of the sfio tests actually succeeded (a couple
of month ago). The license is BSD style if I remember correctly.
The url is www.research.att.com/sw/tools/sfio .
[..]
Christoph
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -