3
GNU Win32 and MSYS are awesome, but it seems like all of their tools use the ANSI version of the Windows API, rather than the Unicode versions.
Obviously, those are meant for Windows 95 and 98, not Windows XP and Windows 7... and they cause lots of problems with any atypical file names, strings, etc.
Is there any similar POSIX toolset (other than Cygwin) that uses the Unicode versions of the Windows API (and which thus supports Unicode)?
Why exclude Cygwin? Also, note that MSYS is a fork of Cygwin. – ak2 – 2012-01-03T06:02:21.797
For clarity, could you give an example of an atypical file name and an atypical string and the problem each causes. – RedGrittyBrick – 2012-01-03T10:24:53.953
@ak2: I'm excluding Cygwin because I'm not looking for Cygwin. The fact that MSYS is a fork of Cygwin doesn't really bother me. – user541686 – 2012-01-03T16:11:54.653
@RedGrittyBrick: If you name a file
╧.txt
and then dols
in MSYS, it saysls: -.txt: No such file or directory
– user541686 – 2012-01-03T16:18:52.4871I just ran
touch ╧.txt
in a Cygwin bash shell, and it shows up with the correct name in Cygwinls
underxterm
, in Windows command prompt, and in Windows Explorer. (It doesn't look right under the default Cygwin bash shell, which uses the same terminal emulator as the Windows command prompt.) It might help to know just why you're "not looking for Cygwin". – Keith Thompson – 2012-01-03T21:46:44.440@KeithThompson: One reason (of many) is that it's ridiculously slow. But I'd rather not go in that direction... I'm just avoiding Cygwin because it doesn't suit my needs. No need for more info. – user541686 – 2012-01-03T22:13:30.423
@Mehrdad: My point is that knowing why you want to avoid Cygwin could tell us something about what your needs are. As far as I can tell, Cygwin does suit your needs as you've stated them so far. (I haven't noticed that it's particularly slow, but I haven't done any performance-sensitive work in Cygwin.) – Keith Thompson – 2012-01-03T22:21:57.003
@KeithThompson: As far as the question goes, it's quite simple: my needs are a Unicode-supporting POSIX toolset (like MinGW, UWIN, GnuWin32, or whatever) that is not Cygwin. I'm pretty darn sure that this is crystal clear. I'm not going to continue discussing the intricacies of why I don't/can't use Cygwin, so if you don't continue asking about this, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks! – user541686 – 2012-01-03T22:42:36.533
@Mehrdad: If you don't want to provide information, I'll be glad not to try to help you. – Keith Thompson – 2012-01-03T22:49:51.403
1@KeithThompson: Well, you can treat it, for all intents and purposes, as though my employer has banned Cygwin at work and forbidden my discussing why I can't use it. I don't want to fight him about it. If you still can't help, then that's totally fine; thanks for trying anyhow. – user541686 – 2012-01-03T22:52:40.670
1@Mehrdad: If you can't provide information, that's a different story. That wasn't clear (to me) from the original question, or from your previous comments. I suggest that something like "I can't use Cygwin for reasons I can't disclose" in the question would have been useful. To clarify, MSYS would be ok if it worked? – Keith Thompson – 2012-01-03T22:59:04.993
@KeithThompson: Yes, MinGW/MSYS and GnuWin32 (and probably others) would be fine if they worked. – user541686 – 2012-01-03T23:05:13.327