| 1 |
On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 10:39 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
| 2 |
> > |
| 3 |
> > Hmm... I don't see any limitation at the download page: |
| 4 |
> > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=93FF2201-325E- |
| 5 |
> > 487F-A398-EFDE5758C47F&displaylang=en |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Yeah, it seems i was right, and SUA runs on any SP1 vista. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > I will take a try some day, even I find installing 500Mb to run |
| 11 |
> > GentooAlt is quite overkill, compared to msys/mingw. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Interix was what we where using at our company, and so I started porting |
| 14 |
> prefix to it. Wether this is the best or not was never the discussion |
| 15 |
> (although I feel that interix behaves more predictable (not necessarily |
| 16 |
> better) than cygwin. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
To complete that: |
| 19 |
We used Cygwin on Win2000 in production, and it was quite stable there. |
| 20 |
But with upcoming Windows XP and 2003, especially with more than one CPU |
| 21 |
or Core, we encountered instabilities like 'make' dying here and there, |
| 22 |
most likely due to hard-to-find synchronisation problems between |
| 23 |
processes. |
| 24 |
So we switched to Interix, which is quite stable, although doesn't have |
| 25 |
recent GNU userland - but we already have Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, so that |
| 26 |
was a minor problem. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
We didn't try Cygwin again since, but eventually these synchronisation |
| 29 |
issues are fixed now. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Can't say anything on MinGW, but you're invited to do the 'x86-cygwin' |
| 32 |
or 'x86-mingw' port ;) |
| 33 |
But don't expect the current Interix port being of much help. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
HTH, |
| 36 |
/haubi/ |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Michael Haubenwallner |
| 39 |
Gentoo on a different level |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives