Slashdot Mirror


Cygwin 1.7 Released

jensend writes "The 1.7 branch of Cygwin, the Unix-like environment for Windows, has reached stable status after about 3 1/2 years of effort. Among many other changes, this release drops support for Windows 9x. Since the NT API and NT-based versions of Windows are more capable and somewhat less of a mismatch with POSIX (for instance, they include a security model), this has allowed for code path simplifications, better performance (particularly noticeable with pipe I/O), better security, and better POSIX compatibility."

21 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. One question remains... by gzipped_tar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... Does it run under WINE?

    --
    Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    1. Re:One question remains... by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, Cygwin does run under WINE. And WINE runs under Cygwin. It can be an amusing stress test.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  2. Does this do something SFU doesn't? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Windows has had a POSIX layer of its own for awhile now, as "Services for Unix".

    On the lighter-weight end, mingw can give you the basics, and they usually run much faster (even bash!) than Cygwin did. Maybe Cygwin is better now, it's just that I don't really see what it has over, well, any other way of running POSIX apps on Windows.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, but Services For Unix seem to be coming to an end. The download says it won't work on Vista or 7, and the Wikipedia page says it will stop being downloadable at the end of 2009.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by Genocaust · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why not something less convoluted like andLinux? I used Cygwin when I first started tinkering with Linux when I was young, but there are so many better alternatives at this point I don't understand why it's still around.

      --
      It could be that the only purpose of your life is to serve as a warning to others.
    3. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by yuhong · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which is correct. Windows Server 2003 R2, Vista Enterprise and higher editions have the successor Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications (SUA) available as optional install that replaces SFU.

    4. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by bcat24 · · Score: 4, Informative

      andLinux only supports 32-bit versions of Windows, for one thing. I'd like to give it a spin on my 64-bit Windows 7 desktop, but I can't. Cygwin may not be ideal, but it has the advantage of actually being usable by me. :)

    5. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by cbhacking · · Score: 3, Informative

      They are complimentary.

      Just don't try running them side-by-side without a lot of tweaking. Both use a handful of system environment variables, with a number of collisions (PATH being an obvious one). Cygwin binaries are just wimple Win32 programs (exe/dll extension and all) while SUA binaries are not (they are true POSIX applications, although they use the PE binary format), but since SUA shells will also execute Win32 applications, typing something as simple as "ls" can be ambiguous - is it SUA's /bin/ls or Cygwin's /bin/ls.exe?

      I had the bloody hardest time getting SUA working on a friend's machine once, until I realized he used Cygwin already. At that point I told him to just stick with one or the other per system - there's not enough advantage, and too much hassle, to having them installed on the same box.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    6. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Informative

      You missed the part of the Wikipedia page that pointed out the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) which is the same feature on Vista, Win7, Server 2003 - 2008 R2, and presumeably future releases. There's no sign of it going away soon.

      I use SUA (which, aside from install mechanic, is functionally identical to SFU plus some new features) all the time on Win7. My main CLI shell is bash (pinned to my taskbar), I use ssh more often than remote desktop, I use subversion in Interix rather than something like TortoiseSVN, and I once completed a substantial programming project (involving a multi-threaded, multi-process, networked program for embedded Linux) by developing (and testing) on Interix before (testing and) deploying on Linux. It was substantially easier than rebooting, virtualizing, or working remotely on my school's Linux servers.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    7. Re:Does this do something SFU doesn't? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's Subsystem for Unix-based Applications. There are two editions: a client edition (Vista, Windows 7) and a server edition (Server 2008). The client edition contains, well, clients; the server edition contains servers. This is probably where you got the idea that NIS and NFS servers are no longer supported: they are, but only in the server edition of SUA.

      Microsoft, fucking up userland since 1992.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  3. makes windows marginally bearable by pydev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even after all these years, Microsoft has nothing equivalent to the UNIX command line. The standard cmd.exe is too limited, and Powershell isn't a good interactive shell, it's more like typing at a Python or Ruby interpreter. Cygwin makes doing anything on Windows marginally tolerable and I install it on any Windows machine I happen to use.

    1. Re:makes windows marginally bearable by lena_10326 · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...but both SFU/SUA and Cygwin are pretty much just different shells on top of the limited cmd.exe window, unless you happen to use rxvt (which is usually not worth the trouble).

      What are you talking about? First, only lobotomized moron monkeys would use CMD.EXE. Second, put this

      C:\cygwin\bin\rxvt.exe -e /bin/bash --login

      into a windows short cut. Set "Start in" to c:\cygwin\bin and it works just fine. Now, how much work was that? Have you got 2 minutes to spare out of your day? Quit your bitchin. Wuss.

      What I use:

      C:\cygwin\bin\rxvt.exe -geometry 132x60+0+0 -fn "FixedSys" -e /bin/bash --login

      because the default font is ugly.

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    2. Re:makes windows marginally bearable by cbhacking · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While it requires the higher editions of Windows (XP Pro, Vista/7 Enterprise or Ultimate, any Server edition), you must have missed the presence of the POSIX subsystem in NT (it's been there since the first releases of the OS, incidentally). Called the Subsystem for UNIX Applications (SUA) on recent versions, or Services For UNIX (SFU) on XP and before, the POSIX subsystem is free on supported Windows and includes a decent operating environment called Interix.

      Interix includes a few hundred libraries and utilities, mostly BSD derived or SVR5-derived (you can choose which lineage you want at install) but also including things like the GNU build toolchain (gcc 3 and 4, with support for at least C, C++, and Fortran; I haven't tried any others). Additionally, you can install a package manager and an expanded/updated collection of tools and software from http://suacommunity.com/sua.aspx. Manpages are also included (both for bundled software and Interix packages).

      Bash (along with other shells such as zsh) is available from suacommunity. Interix ships with csh and ksh. I use Interix bash as my standard Windows command line these days, including running Windows CLI utilities. I also run Python and Ruby interpreters from within Interix (suacommunity packages). You can even run graphical applications if you have an X server such as xming (the suacommunity bootstrapper will offer to install it).

      If you have a version of Windows that supports the POSIX subsystem (businesses mostly will), I recommend it over Cygwin. For one thing, you get true *NIX behavior - executables are marked by permissions bits, not by extensions, the filesystem is case-sensitive (technically an install option for Interix, but one you definitely want), and you get UNIX-style permissions including working setUID and setGID (having a working sudo makes using the command line on a non-Administrator Windows session much more pleasant).

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    3. Re:makes windows marginally bearable by daveime · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For *nix users, however, the reverse is usually true.

      Making the half-assed GUI so lousy that people will actually prefer a command line interface is not the right way to go about doing things

  4. Do we finally have unicode support? by Dwedit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For a while, I've been using a modified version of Cygwin in order to get proper UTF-8 support. Does the new version finally integrate a similar feature?

  5. search! by spongman · · Score: 5, Informative

    love the search feature in setup.exe !! long overdue, but welcome nonetheless.

  6. Re:min req windows by BitterOak · · Score: 5, Funny

    who actually uses this... it REQUIRES windows?

    I know. I've been hoping for years they'll release a version for Linux, but they never do.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  7. Yes. by amake · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes. From the announcement:

    - Default character set is now UTF-8, but other character sets are
        supported via an improved internationalization support. See
        http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/setup-locale.html

  8. Re:min req windows by compro01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It works well using WINE.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  9. Re:I was never really impressed by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Cygwin isn't meant to give you all the Linux or Windows system features, just provide a full-featured POSIX emulation layer (at its core, just one DLL), and programs compiled for that. You may still need to use Windows utilities to access Windows-specific features that have no POSIX implementation. However, the important thing is that it basically gives Unix developers a common platform, so anything developed for general Unix systems will compile on Cygwin's POSIX emulation layer.

    Since Cygwin basically throws you into a command shell, it really does require an understanding of the fundamentals of Unix/Linux systems and how to work effectively in a shell. For example, I doubt many users of Slackware or NetBSD would have any substantial complaints about Cygwin. As someone who used Cygwin for years in a corporate environment where I could not use Linux, it was a godsend. I could spend my whole day working in Cygwin without having to mess with Windows development environments. Being able to throw together a bash script that uses grep, sed, awk, etc. is so nice for a stranded Linux user. However, many people do not learn the basic utilities anymore, even basic things such as customizing a login shell.

    If there is a weak point in the Cygwin interactive experience, in my opinion it comes from the fact that the default Windows terminal program is used, which is slow and generally terrible compared to the modern Linux terminal apps. Maybe someday there will be a fast and full-featured replacement. But as it is, the Windows terminal is basically sluggish early 90's cruft that just isn't up to the task. Not a fault of Cygwin, but still a problem when running any such programs on Windows.

    --
    Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
  10. WINE / Cygwin by DrYak · · Score: 4, Informative

    since when does WINE run under cygwin?

    It works both ways, although buggy and not fully functional.
    And as reported by parent poster, this two redundant monsters are used as test cases to assist developers in perfecting both software stacks (by investigating said bugs and lack of functionality)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]