Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 09:27 -0800 schrieb Aleksey Nogin: > > 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. > > I know, and this makes me quite optimistic that it is not that hard to > develop standalone executables for the frequently used Unix utilities.
Any particular reason why the GnuWin32 project doesn't already fulfil this requirement (http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/)? David -- 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
