Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <3D07C4E0.2050603@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 18:02:08 -0400 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Conrad Scott CC: Robert Collins , cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: System-wide mutexes and pthreads References: <005401c2124e$7cb91a90$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <028001c21252$e92c7ba0$6132bc3e AT BABEL> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Conrad Scott wrote: > I know all about the "I used it 'cos I could" feeling. It's a shame that the > daemon isn't a pure win32 program, but I get the feeling that it will depend > more on cygwin features as it develops, rather than fewer; for example, > configuration or log files should obey cygwin naming rather than raw win32. This reminded me of something.... Robert -- once upon a time the idea was bandied about to create a "subcygwin" static library that used only native, non-cygwin calls to directly access the cygwin mount table and sort of duplicate the functionality of (only) these two functions from cygwin.dll: cygwin_conv_to_full_win32_path cygwin_conv_to_posix_path [I'm sure this code is already in setup.exe's codebase -- somewhere]. The idea being so that non-cygwin programs -- like setup.exe and perhaps the eventual rebase utility -- could understand cygwin paths, while remaining "non-cygwin". [I'm license agnostic here; if we want non-open-soure progs to interoperate with cygwin, then the above two functions must be re-engineered by someone who hasn't seen cygwin's code; that's a lot of work. Personally, I'm only worried about open-source progs, so IMO the chinese firewall is unnecessary: use cygwin-inspired code, put it in a GPL'ed static library -- this way Red Hat's license is satisfied, and we get a *static* library that enables, for instance: setup.exe and rebase.exe to understand cygwin paths -- but without relying on cygwin1.dll itself. This is a good and necessary thing for these two specialized programs. Ditto maybe strace.exe, cygcheck.exe (cygwin programs which do not depend on cygwin1.dll) Now, OTOH, cygserver *could* use this library for path access, but why? cygserver, by its very nature, will depend on cygwin1.dll -- so why not use it's path conversion routines. No need to rely on setup's subcygwin.a. I don't see why using cygwin1.dll from cygserver is a bad thing... Anyway, I lost track of what happened with this proposal. Was it decided that this was a bad idea, and that setup rebase strace cygcheck should all continue to duplicate cygwin-like path translation independently, or did the idea just fizzle for lack of volunteers? --Chuck