From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building Emacs-cvs on Cygwin Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 22:58:27 +0200 Message-ID: <85iri6ssjw.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <8564e7wf13.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1161896407 2672 80.91.229.2 (26 Oct 2006 21:00:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:00:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 26 23:00:04 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdCKa-00026K-3R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 23:00:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdCKZ-0008FW-Iu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:00:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GdCKD-0008Eo-Rd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:59:41 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GdCKC-0008Dp-EI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:59:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdCKC-0008Dm-93 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:59:40 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GdCKC-00013r-Fb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:59:40 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1GdCK4-0002YM-9h; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:59:32 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id C62901C452C6; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 22:58:27 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu\, 26 Oct 2006 16\:40\:07 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:61209 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > Microsoft Windows is not a complete system, as it is missing most end > user applications, and is also lacking the toolbox inventory of small > utilities that are a necessary ingredient of POSIX systems. > > One has to add quite a bit of GNU stuff to MS Windows before it > becomes comparably useful. > > I stand corrected. Nonetheless, isn't it a lot more than a kernel? Yes. The lines between kernel and non-kernel are partly drawn differently than in typical POSIX systems (for example, with the whole graphics subsystem running in supervisor mode), and system services and kernels are not separated in a similar way to other system (I seem to remember that the distinction between kernel thread and daemon is not as absolute, but might be mistaken). The basic design for Windows NT/2000/XP (I think) is supposed to be microkernel-based to some degree, whereas the 95/98/ME family is based on an old DOS kernel with both 32bit and graphical extensions. The system "as such" contains quite more than the kernel, that much is true. It is just hard to tell what is kernel and what not: running in supervisor mode does not really seem like the absolute criterion. And the system "as such" has not as much "hands-on" usefulness for doing non-trivial tasks than a typical Unix or lookalike, let alone a GNU/Linux distribution. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum