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
Message-ID: <3F1827A5.3000003@attglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:00:21 -0700
From: Doug VanLeuven <roamdad AT attglobal DOT net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030401
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-list <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Cygwin vs: Windoze services for Unix
References: <3F16A4E9 DOT 7000000 AT citlink DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <3F16A4E9.7000000@citlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean

The interix subsystem isn't as flexible as cygwin IMHO.
The useful bits are the NFS utilities which do not have source & 
password synchronization which has source for *nix (not GPL).

terry wrote:

> I just received an evaluation copy with Linux Magazine as was 
> wondering if this is a direct 'competitive' product to Cygwin, and if 
> so, what are the significant functional differences (other than the 
> obvious - not being open source / free software and Cygwin being 
> higher quality, of course ;>).

-- 

Doug VanLeuven




--
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/