Message-ID: <4AFC30AD.3070602@tlinx.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:58:37 -0800
From: Linda Walsh <cygwin@tlinx.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 ThunderBrowse/3.2.6.5 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: cygwin-64bit
References: <4AFBF760.6090903@tlinx.org> <20091112141452.GA19308@calimero.vinschen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20091112141452.GA19308@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 12 03:54, Linda Walsh wrote:
>> I am having my first experiences on 64-bit windows and noticed that 32-bit
>> processes, more so than 64-bit user processes are virtualized are not able
>> to access or see parts of the machine.  This is especially noticeable in the
>> registry.
> 
> Did you notice the /proc/registry32 and /proc/registry64 keys in Cygwin
> 1.7?  Also, did you notice the new regtool options --wow32 and --wow64?
> And, did you notice the virtual $SYSTEMROOT\Sysnative folder which
> allows to access the 64 bit system32 folder since Windows Vista?
---
	No to all of the above.  My vista machine got a bit hosed
before I could try 1.7 on it.


> A 64 bit Cygwin would be cool, but we lack time and especially active
> community support to get this done.
---
	Wish I didn't have severe typing disabilities, among other issues,
but then I'd probably not be on permanent disability and be working 
and not have the time.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple