RE: cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave

2002-10-21 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:43:30 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave I have been using the cygwin environment for a month now and have these things to report and recommend. All in all, it has worked surprisingly well. I have been developing CLI a

Re: cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave

2002-10-21 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:55:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi David, > >I just wanted to make two comments based on your observations below. > > 1. File extensions are already optional on NT-based platforms. >Originally, > Cygwin didn't enforce ".exe" for exectuables. This was added

cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave

2002-10-21 Thread David Nicol
I have been using the cygwin environment for a month now and have these things to report and recommend. All in all, it has worked surprisingly well. I have been developing CLI and socket-based C applications for a unix target system with no bumps at all. SKIP DOWN A BIT TO AVOID DISCUSSION OF

Re: cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave

2002-10-21 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Original Message: - From: Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 15:26:34 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: cygwin use report: vexec, UML, off-topic X rave On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:55:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi David, > >I ju