Re: Msys 2 Work in progress

On 9/12/2011 12:06 PM, Vincent Torri wrote:
> i would just like an msys2 faster for configure scripts than msys 1.
> Configuring gettext, gnutls, etc... are too long with msys1. If msys 2
> is not faster than msys 1, i don't see the benefits of msys 2 for me.

There are two ways to go:

1) more stripped down, less posix support: faster, but current apps
(like, say, coreutils: even coreutils-5.97) will break as it depends on
the current posix feature set of msys-1.  And forget about updating to
newer platform apps like coreutils-8.10.

2) more posix support: allows to update core platform apps to newer
versions -- since cygwin capabilities drive upstream feature
exploitation, and msys is a "walled garden", newer upstream projects
continually add new requirements on new cygwin features.  This makes
porting to msys1 harder and harder every year. I currently have to add a
lot of (old) workarounds to msys-ssh -- workarounds that USED to be in
the upstream code under #ifdef __CYGWIN__, but have now been removed as
unnecessary on cygwin.  This is true for many upstream projects.

Thus, I don't see #1 as feasible longterm. We really have to go with #2,
or we'll be stuck with older and older (relatively speaking) versions of
the application suites (such as coreutils, ssh, etc).

The price of progress.

--
Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop 
What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses
from deploying virtual desktops?   How do next-generation virtual desktops
provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable
virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/