Guy tried it recently, and failed. Here the problem is that even it compiles (which currently it isn't due to some errors in thread code), there are more problems which need to be fixed. Probably we don't even know what (hbtest fails that's for sure).
Difficult to judge Cygwin's position, now it's part of Red Hat, my personal opinion is that I've always felt the whole concept very odd and every time I hear about a product that can run under Cygwin only, that product is written off as a no-option for me. Probably all the bad experiences and failed attempts from the past plus the strange mixed world of win+*nix which isn't a very clean concept. There is also cygwin1.dll, which is a perfect showcase for the .dll hell problem. I use a few cmdline tools which still need Cygwin, but I only do this if there is no better option available. In the case of Harbour we compile cleanly and natively on Windows, so there is no need for such hack. The other aspect, is that by now the preferred, clean and easy to go way of running *nix stuff on Windows, is simple OS virtualization. It doesn't solve all the problems, that's for sure, but at least it works, and now it can even be done with purely free tools. So, I think the future of Cygwin is either fading or uncertain. What Red Hat is doing with it? Maybe helping the integration of not-yet-natively-ported Linux apps/tools with Windows for corporate customers? Hard to tell. For Harbour it doesn't have much point, and we only have it because when we started the project, MinGW didn't exist yet (it started to exist as -mno-cygwin option inside Cygwin.) So my vote to delete it. Brgds, Viktor On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Przemyslaw Czerpak <[email protected]>wrote: > On Thu, 05 Mar 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > > and more thing: What about Cygwin? > > It seems it doesn't work currently (hbtest fails instantly). > > Delete or fix? > > Hard to say for me. > In the past I was using CygWin though to be honest CygWin > was always a problem itself and was never stable enough. > I do not know current status of CygWin project. In Harbour > probably it can be used as test layer for some Windows builds > which does not use windows API. F.e. there is CEGCC for WinCE > which gives some POSIX layer for pure console application. > I even created such build for tests. Most of code we keep > for CygWin is also necessary for CEGCC. > But the question what to do with CygWin port should be addressed > to Windows users not to me. Does anyone use here use CygWin and > maybe also tried to create CygWin builds. > > best regards, > Przemek > _______________________________________________ > Harbour mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour >
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
