Re: next release of Lout is approaching (mingw vs cygwin)

[Antonio Regidor García]

Hi,

On windows, I only use lout calling it from other programs. I work for a 
software company and write programs that use lout for printing. So, when 
choosing between mingw and cygwin, the smaller and easier to install is the 
better. I didn't use cygwin a lot, so I don't know: For a lout executable 
compiled for cygwin, would it suffice to simply copy the cygwin dll to the lout 
directory?

Greetings,

Antonio Regidor Garcia

> Also, since Lout may write to its library directory, it may
> run 
> afoul of Vista security rules, if someone deign to install
> it in a 
> certain way. There is no quick and easy way to redo the
> Unixy Lout 
> to run the Windows way good and proper, so I consider the
> MinGW 
> command-line version an evolutionary dead end. If I were to
> do all 
> of this again, I would have stuck to Cygwin... :-)
> 
> I think Cygwin would be a better in the long term rather
> than DOS 
> Prompt. Even I hardly use DOS Prompt any more, it's
> usually a Msys 
> shell or a Cygwin shell. DOS Prompt is more and more a
> thing of 
> the past on Win32 for non-'IT admin' users. Being
> less of a novice 
> programmer now, I would now want to keep project files up
> to date 
> using at least a makefile, and for this I would immediately
> prefer 
> to be using bash on Msys or Cygwin.
> 
> At least Cygwin on Win32, at the moment, has a secure
> future 
> (better still with Unicode support coming in 1.7) and a
> healthy 
> community with good and proper shell scripting, and can 
> accommodate Lout most easily.
> 
> Just my 2 cents. Other views welcome.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
> Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! 
Regístrate ya - http://correo.yahoo.es