Subject: Re: Bug in od, cat, etc reading binary files
From: [email-masked] (Earnie Boyd)

30 Sep 1997 05:25:43 -0700
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain
To: [email-masked]

>From: [email-masked]
>Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 08:09:17 -0600
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: Bug in od, cat, etc reading binary files
>
>
>Hi..
>
>>The cygwin32 isn't for compatibility with NT it is to provide a 
>>mechanism for which those things that aren't can be ported to the 
win32 
>>environment.
>
>But for what reason?  If you can't use these things with the rest of 
the
>NT world, then what is the point?  Why not just run them in the Unix 
world
>where they are happier anyhow?
>
>>Because of this the cygwin32 layer must try to be 
>>compatible to both worlds (which it does, nicely).  The problem isn't 
>>cygwin32 it is the lack of tools ported without modification for 
binary 
>>versus text that is the problem.  Therefore remaining in the binary 
>>format is not an alternative it becomes necessary.
>
>Yes, well, if the requirements are that you must run some Unix programs 
on
>NT without modification, then using cygwin32 and binary mounts may be 
the
>solution.  However, I believe that the problem may need to be 
reconsidered
>because without the additional requirement of interoperability with the 
NT
>world, why require that it run on NT in the first place?  Just for the
>fun of it?
>
>marcus hall
>-

Well, if one can have the best of both worlds in one environment, why 
not?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".