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
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: Cygwin vs: Windoze services for Unix
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:20:07 -0500
Message-ID: <03C99898510C8C47945B932907D99AAA02E896@E2KMEMMCS1.ftbco.ftn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0
From: "DePriest, Jason R." <jrdepriest AT ftb DOT com>
To: "cygwin-list" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2003 21:20:07.0627 (UTC) FILETIME=[5CDF89B0:01C34D72]
X-DCC-FTBDCCD1-Metrics: dns1 1130; Body=0 Fuz1=0 Fuz2=0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id h6ILKVV02219

I used to have a universal subscription to MSDN (until I switched
departments) and I was able to test Windows Services for Unix and the
(at the time) separate Interix subsystem.

They do what they are supposed to do, but cygwin does a whole lot more.

I found the cygwin project to be actively developed and far more robust
than the other offerings.

I have no idea what the newest versions of WSfU offer, but I highly
doubt it has the day-to-day usefulness of cygwin.

-Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug VanLeuven [mailto:roamdad AT attglobal DOT net] 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 12:00 PM
To: cygwin-list
Subject: Re: Cygwin vs: Windoze services for Unix


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/

--
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/