delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Cygwin without Win32 |
From: | Dax Kelson <dax AT gurulabs DOT com> |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Message-Id: | <1074544647.2499.22.camel@mentor.gurulabs.com> |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
Date: | Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:37:27 -0700 |
The newly released Microsoft Services For Unix (SFU v3.5) includes a new "highly tuned" POSIX subsystem. MS says that UNIX apps using the POSIX subsystem are within 10% performance of Windows apps using the Win32 subsystem. The security models also work together so that chmod/chown/su and friends all work properly. It would be nice to see an implementation of setfacl and getfacl. Would there be any benefit to porting Cygwin to sit directly on top the POSIX subsystem instead of going through the Win32 subsystem? kernel <-> POSIX <-> cygwin (bash, et al) instead of kernel <-> WIN32 <-> cygwin.dll <-> cygwin (bash, et al) Just curious. Dax Kelson -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |