Cygwin performance (was ÆANNàPW32 the...)

Peter Ring
Tue Mar 14 01:52:00 GMT 2000

I'd be interested in comparisons not just of raw performance, but also
other aspects, e.g. security, POSIX conformance, ways of dealing with
file modes, drive letters, links, forking, inter-process communication,
wealth of contributions, size of community, business model, etc. etc.
Cygwin and the applications ported to cygwin are alternatives to running
a *nix box, and so are the other "UNIX on a Windows box" systems.
Studying alternatives can help clarifying the design goals; i.e., which
is most important, interoperating with native applications, or easy port
of *nix applications? Open source, or M$ brand name?

Interix, BTW, was recently acquired by Microsoft; Interix 2.2 was
released only a week ago. The product now incorporates former Interix
Workstation Lite, Interix SDK and Interix Server Lite - 25 user telnet,
but excludes the X server, at $129 a seat. You might as well get used to
it; Microsoft wants to have a piece of the action as well as defend the
position on the desktop. More info at .

Kind regards
Peter Ring

-----Original Message-----
From: Geoffrey Noer [ ]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 3:09 AM
Subject: Cygwin performance (was ÆANNÅ PW32 the...)


Have people run any benchmarks comparing Cygwin, Uwin, NuTcracker,
Interix, anything else out there?


Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to

More information about the Cygwin mailing list