At 07:12 PM 1/19/2004, Andrew DeFaria you wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:37:27PM -0700, Dax Kelson wrote: >> >>>The newly released Microsoft Services For Unix (SFU v3.5) includes a new "highly >>>tuned" POSIX subsystem. MS says that UNIX apps using the POSIX subsystem are within >>>10% performance of Windows apps using the Win32 subsystem. The security models also >>>work together so that chmod/chown/su and friends all work properly. It would be >>>nice to see an implementation of setfacl and getfacl. >>> >>>Would there be any benefit to porting Cygwin to sit directly on top the POSIX >>>subsystem instead of going through the Win32 subsystem? >> >>There would certainly be a real detriment in the fact that cygwin would stop working >>for Windows 95/98/Me. If we could focus just on NT class systems, there is all sorts >>of improvements that we could make. I don't think that all of the people using those >>systems would be too happy with us, though, as much as I'd like to ditch them. > >Has anybody actually measured how many 9x/Me Cygwin users there are compared with NT >and greater?
No, not that has been reported to this list anyway. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/
