On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point the > issue becomes political in some sense: Do we want to give up our Unix > habits just to support an OS we (often enough) do not like, and would > only cover to get more love from the world? > > There could be an alternative: The "busybox approach". We could develop > a toolkit that covers all the Unix commands we need for the existing > build scripts. It would include easy things like cp, mv etc., but also a > classic "make" (medium difficulty, note that it could reuse the > godi_make code), and especially a POSIX shell. The latter is a bit of > work, but not too much. I'd guess the overall effort takes not more than > 1-2 weeks if done by somebody how knows the semantics of the tools very > well. > > There are a number of advantages over Cygwin: > - No danger of running into licensing problems > - The Unix compatibility is only maintained for commands, but not on > the system call level (eaiser to use, less surprises, fewer deps,...) > - It would only be a small download, and easy to integrate into > installers
Note that to a degree, OMake already provides the ability to do Unix-style things under Windows. Aleksey -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
