Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla1.2 on cygwin

[Robert Collins]

On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 13:20, Tom Lord wrote:

> Is it?  It seems to me that they involve different and unordered
> trade-offs.   ("It seems to me" doesn't count for much at all in this
> context since it isn't much of an exaggeration to say, of my knowledge
> of Windows, "Didn't that evolve out of DOS?").
> 
> Won't it, especially as libtla comes on line, make sense to support
> all three if that's practical?
> 
> The question from my perspective, is really the impact on the code of
> any particular approach.   If it's clean and isolated or clean and
> minor -- then sure, let's add it.

Complete ack. At least two approaches will be useful - 'unix-like' and
'win32-native'. And cygwin and SFU are not all that interoperable - From
what I've heard SFU is -still- a subsystem, which means interoperation
with win32 processes is marginal at best.

I'm pro supporting all three ports, provided clean code.

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part