RE: Is there a Squid port for NT going on?

There's also gnuwin32, basically a port of gcc and some tools (bash, grep,
sed, make) to win95+nt, which of course is under GPL. You might want to
check http://www.cygnus.com/
Sadly enough, it is still in beta, and "make" keeps crashing win95 for
some makefiles (including squid's). I also saw sed/grep hang my pc so
after a while I decided to install a cross-compiler on my freebsd box.
With this i got squid all the way to linking where to my dispair, every
function was said to be unresolved, and no signs of what might be going
wrong. So, that was it, I had enough of trying to port squid to 95/nt :)
If anyone's interested in taking his chances, I'd be more than glad to
share my stories.

-Kostas

ps: if you're generally interested in getting a unix-feel to windoz,
you'll get dissapointed pretty fast: it _just_ isn't the _real_ thing.

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, WaiSun Chia wrote:

> There is a product out there ( http://www.opennt.com ), which actually
> emulates a Posix compliant Unix-like OS under Windows NT! Yeah it's a
> bit difficult to swallow at first...but after downloading the White
> Paper and going through the FAQs, it seems quite plausible as they
> have ported most development stuff.
>
> Furthermore, they claim that with this thingamajig installed in NT,
> you can build native Unix apps unmodified. Apache 1.2.4 is stated as
> one of the apps successfully built with this system.
>
> I'm still not completely sold on this but I've sent for a demo CD.
>
> After which I get that CD, first thing I'm gonna try to build is
> SQUID!!!
>
> Tell you more when I get the CD and try building Squid...
>
> Anyone who has experience with this product??
>
> Wish me luck,
> Wai Sun
>
> p.s. I'm in no way affliated with these dudes...
>
> ----------
> From: Bill Wichers[SMTP:billw@unix0.waveform.net]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 1998 7:54 AM
> To: Pedro Manuel
> Cc: squid-users@nlanr.net
> Subject: Re: Is there a Squid port for NT going on?
>
> Since you already have a Squid box running Linux, then I assume
> someone
> has given you an order like "Thou shalt build an NT Proxy!". In this
> case
> "Thou" needs some sense beeten into them. You'd be much better off
> running
> on Linux, and it'll cost you a LOT less... RedHat Linux (just started
> playing with 5.0 which is REALLY nice, BTW) is $49 -- and it has some
> reasonable docs of its own now, and Squid will be all of $0. That runs
> you
> A grand total of $49 for the software, and you'd need the hardware
> either
> way -- although NT would force you to purchase more hardware than the
> Linux solution would. From personal expierience with both paltforms,
> Linux
> is much more miserly about it's RAM usage than NT is.
>
> NT Also needs a lot more disk space than Linux. My NT box here uses
> 179 MB
> for the OS alone (and that doesn't include the bits and pieces it has
> in
> other places). I had at one time a functional Linux box running with
> only
> one 40 MB drive, and I have built capable (although very small)
> caches
> with 170 MB drives. I'd say Linux starts to become a useful OS when
> you
> have about 120 MB or so of disk space, below that you can't fit
> enough
> important stuff (notably all the sources and C stuff) to do any cool
> stuff. NT isn't even an option with less than 125 MB (according to
> the
> box).
>
> And if reliability is a concern, I have several functioning Squid
> machines
> up right now, one with well over 200 days of uptime. This isn't very
> difficult to achieve with UNIX systems. I've never had an NT box run
> that
> long without needing a reboot for at least a software patch.
>
> Oh darn, I forgot to disable soapbox mode...
>
> Well, if you have to run on NT (sometimes this happens with our
> clients
> that have only an NT machine and no money for a new system), then
> your
> only option is probably Net App's NetCache product, which is somewhat
> similar to Squid. I'm not a big fan of MS Proxy due to the problems
> I've
> seen it cause. My limited expierience with Netcache shows it to be
> pretty
> capable, although I admit I havn't ever tested it with much load --
> all my
> production caches run Squid on Linux.
>
> -Bill
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Pedro Manuel wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi to all.
> >
> > I am not a member of this list, but i read in some documentation
> > here was the best place to ask. I have a working Squid solution
> > working under Linux, but now in the company i work for i need to
> find
> > a good and simple caching proxy for NT. Is there an ongoing port
> > to NT? I was told there is one for OS/2 warp.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pedro Manuel Rodrigues
> >
>
>
Received on Mon Jan 12 1998 - 23:40:22 MST