Subject: Re: [boost] cygwin API: posix or windows
From: Jim Bell (Jim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-07 12:30:53
On 1:59 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:32 PM, vicente.botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> In my humble opinion cygwin is a wrapper of posix intefaces under windows OS.
>> What's the experience of others?
> Boost.Filesystem V2 implementation code provided an option on Windows
> of compiling under GCC using the POSIX API. It was difficult to test,
> rarely worked well, was a source of confusion, and wasted too much of
> my time. So Filesystem V3 and Boost.System dropped any pretense of
> compiling with the POSIX API on Windows. There have been no complaints
> so far.
FWIW, I vaguely recall some time ago trying to get a straight-CygWin
regression test going. (Or was it just building boost?) It didn't go
well and I bagged it: paths were coming out in both CygWin (correctly:
/cygdrive/c/...) and Windows native ('C:\...'), and I couldn't quite
track it down to a single point of failure.
As another aside, CygWin's license is much less desirable than MinGW's:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk