Quantifying the time overhead of Cygwin make

[Bjoern Michaelsen]

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 01:22:16PM +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> You mean cmd.exe + coreutils should be enough?

Ideally yes, plus some POSIX shell.

> Probably bash or some other POSIX shell too, surely?

Yeah. Note that e.g. busybox already includes the ash shell.

> Is there a non-Cygwin such that actually would support all the shell
> constructs we use? Is its complexity that much less than Cygwin's?

busybox, msys, there are quite a few standalone bash ports.

Note that I am not saying we should stop all other work and kill additional
dependencies now, but keeping an eye on not needlessly introducing hard
dependencies to keep our options is a Good Thing(tm) IMHO.

Best,

Bjoern