Gentoo Archives: gentoo-cygwin

From: Trevor Forbes <t4bs@×××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-cygwin@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-cygwin] interest in gentoo-cygwin
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 12:32:10
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-cygwin] interest in gentoo-cygwin by Patrick Lauer
Patrick Lauer wrote:

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