Cygdaemon - planning

Nicholas Wourms
Thu Jul 3 15:23:00 GMT 2003 wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:17:54AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>Do we want this?  Wouldn't it be better to have a separate export library
>>for the functions only available with cygserver?
> In this scenario, we have always gone with "what does UNIX do?"  I think it
> is pretty likely that the main users of this code will be existing programs
> which expect not to have to look in other libraries to find Sys V shm and
> semaphores.  So, putting the exports in some other library will result in
> configury changes for existing programs which is something that cygwin
> tries to avoid.
> cgf

Since we have the ddk now, what about making Cygserver into a System 
Device Driver (sys) in the same fashion as the driver for ioperm() or 
WinPcap?  Of course, this could easily open up another can of worms, but 
doesn't U/Win & SFU already do this?  One could also considier the 
potential performance gains by going this route.  It would be easier in 
that users wouldn't have to remeber to turn on server, but I suppose 
problematic in that we'd have to worry about a file installed outside of 
the traditional Cygwin tree.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list