| 1 |
Patrick Lauer wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:27 +0930, Trevor Forbes wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>I copied portage over from my main PC which eix reports it as 2.1_pre3-r1. |
| 7 |
>>However, my Cygwin installation is not very clean so there could be |
| 8 |
>>anything hiding in there. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>That shouldn't be much of a problem, as long as you have python and a toolchain |
| 12 |
>(make/gcc/...) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>>/ I think the linker problem was fixed some time ago, but if not it can |
| 17 |
>>be fixed. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>Would be nice ... |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>>The libc functions can be add when needed. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>Lots of work. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
>>File semantics can be fixed, the whole Cygwin idea is to look like Linux.. |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>Not really :-) |
| 33 |
>Windows takes file semantics from DOS (legacy, no technical reason for |
| 34 |
>that) |
| 35 |
>An open file usually can't be modified - so Cygwin keeps a mapping table |
| 36 |
>to fool you. |
| 37 |
>This is not as reliable as "native" Unix - also many packages make |
| 38 |
>implicit assumptions about e.g. file system layout which don't work well |
| 39 |
>with Cygwin. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
>>I don't expect it to be easy, it may in the end, be unworkable. I am |
| 44 |
>>just interested to see how far I can take it. Its just going to be a |
| 45 |
>>slow process... |
| 46 |
>> |
| 47 |
>> |
| 48 |
>That's why I looked at SFU, it seems to be a bit smarter than Cygwin. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
>Patrick |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
Tks, looks like I have lots to do.... :) |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Trevor |
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
gentoo-cygwin@g.o mailing list |
Archives