From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris McGee Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Message-Id: <142EFC4E-150D-4752-9FBD-3FDB4EE4E967@yahoo.ca> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 21:27:27 -0400 References: <052AE7BC-8AD5-4C0D-9E7A-F67F9B02905C@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <052AE7BC-8AD5-4C0D-9E7A-F67F9B02905C@gmail.com> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9670d94c-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 I was thinking of using Cygwin to see would be capable of compiling p9p. Chris > On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Simmons wrote: >=20 > What the subject line says. >=20 > This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan=E2=80=99s 9pm, or= the guys who did pf9. I=E2=80=99m just asking because there are still chunk= s of p9p that I=E2=80=99d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I w= ant (mostly the command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I=E2=80=99= ve managed to build under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth= out and learn to eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don=E2=80= =99t use syntax highlighting))) >=20 > But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be de= pendent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp for a= nother. >=20 > So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the Unix-specific s= tuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows? >=20 > Go in peace > James V Choate XXXVI >=20 >=20 >=20