This is the mail archive of the cygwin@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Native Windows NT POSIX capabilities


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hyperion" <noog@libero.it>
To: <cygwin@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 10:36 AM
Subject: Native Windows NT POSIX capabilities


> As some of you already know (well, I guess), Windows NT has native
> (incomplete) POSIX support. This is true since the obsolete Windows NT
> 3, but only in Windows NT 5, with the improvements to the file system,
> the POSIX support makes sense (still incomplete, but functional). They
> even released a package named Interix, it's the equivalent of Cygwin
> (shells, complilers, perl, even a X server) but runs directly on the
> POSIX API, instead of emulating it with the Win32 API. Obviously it
> doesn't support any Windows NT below 5.

And INTERIX was licenced under the GPL at one pointin time - if you look
around the source is available.

> My question is: has anyone tried to build a GNU util linking against
> crtdll (Microsoft C Runtime) and psxdll (POSIX API)? is it difficult
or
> just a trivial joke? Is it possible, at the present time, to build a
> cross-compiler that works with the native POSIX API implementation of
> Windows NT? I'd love to handle this myself, but I know zip about
> compilers and I'm no C programmer (hint: my programs always begin with
> "program" and end with "end." ;), and I'm afraid the porting wouldn't
be
> that easy. If this had been discussed before, I'll just quit asking.

I don't think this particular case has been discussed, but the posix
subsystem vs cygwin has been. I couldn't find anything in a quick look
at the user guide or FAQ..

The core reason is that a) the NT POSIX subsystem is woefully
incomplete. And b) not everyone has or desires Windows NT (in any
incarnation) and c) interoperating the posix subsystem with the Win32
subsytem isn't as transparent as "simply" running POSIX applications
within the win32 subsystem.

> Anyway the advatages would be a better file system support
> (case-sensitive filenames
cygwin has that.
> , filenames not supported by Win32,
There's only a half dozen that cause problems: aux, lpt1 and the like.
>native path remapping, etc) and really improved performance. It would
have a limited
> target (Windows 2000 or better), but it would piss off Microsoft too
;)
> And it would be a great way to push Cygwin as a commercial product.
The
> only thing that pisses me off is the moronic implementation of
Berkeley
> sockets :( (darn WSAStartup()!)
>
> FYI, here are the functions exported by psxdll.dll:
> (is something missing?)
>

In a word yes. compare the list with
http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq.html#SEC20

>From the top of my head, pthread (_POSIX_THREADS) functions are
completely absent, as are semaphore, and memory management.

Rob
>
>
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
>


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]