This is the mail archive of the cygwin@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Is Cygwin really required?

From: Warren Young <warren at etr-usa dot com>
To: Cygwin-L <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:26:06 -0600
Subject: Re: Is Cygwin really required?
References: <Xns9361B766BBBBAlucianoavgmxnet@80.91.224.249> <b7us4r$bcb$1@main.gmane.org>

Rolf Campbell wrote:

The Win32 version will not support posix paths. But, other than that, it should still work fine.

You may also get some strange line ending translation problems if you don't use the one compiled under Cygwin.

If you really must have the brandest newest version of sed, I'd get the source and rebuild it yourself. It shouldn't be difficult. The main trick is then coping with future upgrades; you don't want to have both /usr/local/bin/sed and /usr/bin/sed, for example.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

References:
- Is Cygwin really required?
  - From: Luciano
- Re: Is Cygwin really required?
  - From: Rolf Campbell

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]