> > I have seen src/os/util_win32.c contains some code on that. I suppose it is
>possible to use that
> > for Cygwin too?!?!
>
> Help 'yrself :-)
I'm doing :) -- but what about that nasty 8.3 filename aliasing thing within
src/os/win32/util_win32.c
-- it isn't handled there in any way explitcitly?!
I tried to "lock" the creation using the registry option, but the (shorten) directory
is still
accessible?!
> We actually waited on the Win32 port until we had a significant userland user base
>that
> was using the code before we made that leap. Since the vast majority of folks
>working with
> the Apache/Windows code base have focused on the Win32 layer, that port is, at this
>point,
> considerably better vetted today.
of course, the usage of Apache for Cygwin is still very limited, but the ammount of
Cygwin user is
very well performing and that's why I think we will have more demand on that side.
> Secondly, with the exception of folks with the Unix background, I believe your
>assertion would
> cause some confusion amoung novice users, and I'd be -1 on 'recommending' Cygwin to
>that class
> of users [find build tools... install build tools... etc, etc.] But this is a
>seperate and
> distinct argument, and I'll shut up and let some other people chime in their
>thoughts now.
Beta release quality would be enough in the first term, at least as long as the
ammount of users using
it is not that exhausting.
> Let me see if this language helps;
>
> "The Win32 port of Apache is built on its own, custom code within Apache to assure
> interoperability with the Windows operating systems. While it is considered release
> quality, it is slower and less thoroughly tested than the Unix ports. The Cygwin
> alternative uses the well tested unix code by using the Cygwin portability layer for
> Unix emulation. The Cygwin port may suffer from gaps in security or reliability due
> to the interaction of the Cygwin compatibility layer to the native Windows API."
>
> "The Win32 port will be more familiar to most Windows users. The Cygwin port will
>be more
> familiar to Unix admins and developers, including the Apache/Unix build environment.
> Due to
> these two different code bases, the security and reliability of the two ports are
>unrelated
> to each other. The Win32 port should be considered the more secure of the two at
>this time.
> The Win32 port is recommended for most Windows users, however the Cygwin port offers
>an
> extra layer of compatibility for Unix developers."
+1 :)
See ya,
Stipe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG
M�nsterstr. 248
40470 D�sseldorf
Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
wapme.net - wherever you are
