From: Bernd.Schilpp@brokat.de (Bernd Schilpp) Subject: Re: What about RSXNT instead of cygwin32??? 14 Oct 1997 10:02:11 -0700 Message-ID: <34432E80.9D7EA899.cygnus.gnu-win32@brokat.de> References: <3442267F.D80D15EE@brokat.de> Reply-To: Bernd.Schilpp@brokat.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Peter Dalgaard BSA Cc: gnu-win32@cygnus.com Peter Dalgaard BSA wrote: > Yes, I've tried that and it certainly seems to be a class act, > although not as ambitious as cygwin32. The most obvious difference is > that there are no Unix utilities beyond 'make' coming with it. In > particular, there's no shell, so configure scripts can't work. In > contrast, cygwin32 is trying to reach a state where you can take Unix > sources and just type "./configure; make". Thank you for writing of your experience with RSXNT. I agree with you, that it is very convenient, if you have a development-environment - like cygwin32 offers - where you can act just like in a unix-environment. But my Problem is, that threads are very important for the purpose of my Programs - so I need threadsave libaries. Does anybody know, when cygwin32 is going to have threadsave libaries ? -- Greetings, Bernd - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".