| 1 |
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:27 +0930, Trevor Forbes wrote: |
| 2 |
> I copied portage over from my main PC which eix reports it as 2.1_pre3-r1. |
| 3 |
> However, my Cygwin installation is not very clean so there could be |
| 4 |
> anything hiding in there. |
| 5 |
That shouldn't be much of a problem, as long as you have python and a toolchain |
| 6 |
(make/gcc/...) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> / I think the linker problem was fixed some time ago, but if not it can |
| 9 |
> be fixed. |
| 10 |
Would be nice ... |
| 11 |
> The libc functions can be add when needed. |
| 12 |
Lots of work. |
| 13 |
> File semantics can be fixed, the whole Cygwin idea is to look like Linux.. |
| 14 |
Not really :-) |
| 15 |
Windows takes file semantics from DOS (legacy, no technical reason for |
| 16 |
that) |
| 17 |
An open file usually can't be modified - so Cygwin keeps a mapping table |
| 18 |
to fool you. |
| 19 |
This is not as reliable as "native" Unix - also many packages make |
| 20 |
implicit assumptions about e.g. file system layout which don't work well |
| 21 |
with Cygwin. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> I don't expect it to be easy, it may in the end, be unworkable. I am |
| 24 |
> just interested to see how far I can take it. Its just going to be a |
| 25 |
> slow process... |
| 26 |
That's why I looked at SFU, it seems to be a bit smarter than Cygwin. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Patrick |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-cygwin@g.o mailing list |
Archives