On 2014-08-25, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) <[email protected]> wrote: > --bcaec51b1b9968213b050172c4f7 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On 25 Aug 2014 12:44, "Jeroen Demeyer" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think Sage-on-Cygwin is fay more realistic than a pure native (even > stripped down) version of Sage. I you care about Windows, concentrate your > efforts on the Cygwin port. > > Why has so much time been spent on it, without success?
cause M$ is unwilling to release specifications of kernel calls needed to make a good modern implementation of fork(). It is a constant fight against a fundamentally shaky fork() as implemented in Cygwin :-( > > William wrote in 2007 Sage would probably never be built on Cygwin > > http://markmail.org/message/fapx25o3kqipdeg2 > > Then in 2010 described how he got it to build > > https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/sage-windows/ygK1kJm9p9w > > and while I can't find the post, I think William later expressed some > doubt whether it would ever work properly. > > I am on my mobile phone now, so not too easy to browse the web, but I > pretty sure that the Cygwin port was due to be finished before the Solaris > port. > > Maybe there's a case for a fresh start with more modest aims and a cleaner > interface. fresh or not, but Win64-only should probably be more doable. And it would satisfy most of the current demand, IMHO. > > Dave > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
