Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 00:08:07 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: merging mingw and cygwin Message-ID: <20031012040807.GA20101@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <5.1.0.14.0.20031011194820.02edbe98@127.0.0.1> <3F886521.31297.165D351@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F886521.31297.165D351@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 08:16:33PM -0700, Paul G. wrote: >On 11 Oct 2003 at 19:01, Edward Peschko wrote: >>>What would be the point? >> >>lack of end-user confusion... elimination of duplicate development >>effort... elimination of duplicate maintenance effort... the ability >>to compile all unix tools 'native' win32 for those who desire it. > >Umm...Cygwin is setup to compile all, or as many as it is possible to >support, unix/posix tools in a "native" win32 environment at a cost (in >terms of systems resources). The cost is lower (in terms of systems >resources/overhead) for Msys than is the cost (in terms of systems >resources/overhead and in terms of Unix-like support and Posix support) >for Cygwin. In fact it might help to read the documentation (if it >hasn't been read) at the Mingw (http://www.mingw.org) site to get a >better sense of the differences between the two and why those >differences exist. I doubt that the overhead for Msys is any different than Cygwin's. Msys came from cygwin, remember? cgf -- 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/