yup.
Msys is derived from Cygwin. However, it does not have the overhead that
Cygwin does, nor does Msys
support the posix/unixy stuff that Cygwin does...nor should it.
Paul G.
On 12 Oct 2003 at 0:08, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 08:16:33PM -0700, Paul G. wrote:
> >On 11 Oct 2003 at 19:01, Edward Peschko wrote:
> >>>What would be the point?
> >>
> >>lack of end-user confusion... elimination of duplicate development
> >>effort... elimination of duplicate maintenance effort... the
> >>ability to compile all unix tools 'native' win32 for those who
> >>desire it.
> >
> >Umm...Cygwin is setup to compile all, or as many as it is possible to
> >support, unix/posix tools in a "native" win32 environment at a cost
> >(in terms of systems resources). The cost is lower (in terms of
> >systems resources/overhead) for Msys than is the cost (in terms of
> >systems resources/overhead and in terms of Unix-like support and
> >Posix support) for Cygwin. In fact it might help to read the
> >documentation (if it hasn't been read) at the Mingw
> >(http://www.mingw.org) site to get a better sense of the differences
> >between the two and why those differences exist.
>
> I doubt that the overhead for Msys is any different than Cygwin's.
> Msys came from cygwin, remember?
>
> cgf
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
>
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
