Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6910.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: RE: Big Brother is Real Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:37:19 -0800 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Stephan Mueller" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Apr 2003 18:37:20.0239 (UTC) FILETIME=[0F44E7F0:01C2FA10] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id h33IbVq25423 Can someone elaborate on exactly which APIs have changed incompatibly (in 64-bit Windows)? I'm only mildly familiar with the 64-bit story, but my understanding is that the the 64-bit APIs are basically the same as 32-bit (with the natural widening of types) but given that the 64-bit API is 'new' in that there's no legacy (shipped, binary) code base to support, this is probably the best time to make API changes (in 64-bit) that repair bad design decisions and bad interface bugs and so made earlier (in 32-bit API, or maybe even 16-bit). Regardless, how does this affect Cygwin at all? The 32-bit subsystem on 64-bit Windows OSes should run 32-bit apps with no semantic changes -- that's its job, and I would be surprised if the behaviour of any 32-bit APIs was gratuitously different (although it's possible there are bugs -- worth reporting if that's the case). If you're trying to compile cygwin itself for 64-bit, well, you may need to make some cygwin source changes with #ifdefs, yes -- is that the objection here? stephan(); -----Original Message----- From: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of Igor Pechtchanski Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 8:31 AM To: Andrew DeFaria Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Big Brother is Real On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > Tim Prince wrote: > > > Lack of cygwin support has impeded the market penetration of Windows > > XP64, but it seems Microsoft would rather lose out to linux and HPUX > > than let their customers run cygwin. It may be they don't understand > > how many customers depend on cygwin, which is their fault too, since > > they don't support those customers, just collect the fees and forget > > them. > > How exactly does Microsoft stop their customers from running Cygwin? > I'm curious because as you even admit "many customers depend on > cygwin" so it is demonstrable that Microsoft has no power to stop > their customers from running Cygwin. Microsoft doesn't "stop their customers from running Cygwin", it introduces API changes that are incompatible with previous versions, and thus cause programs like Cygwin to not run. Whether this is deliberate or accidental remains debatable. Igor -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/