From: mutazilah@gmail.com   
      
   On 21/02/24 15:06, J.O. Aho wrote:   
      
   >>>> And it is not important to maintain the same value   
   >>>> as Cygwin, because Cygwin creates PE executables,   
   >>>> while mine is for ELF executables.   
   >>>   
   >>> Are you just trying to keep your Linux source   
   >>> source-compatible with your (Cygwin-based) Windows   
   >>> source? Or are you actually looking for the functionality   
   >>> behind the O_TEXT flag?   
   >>   
   >> The latter. Functionality on PDOS/386, not Linux.   
   >   
   > Think you need to look into the windows source code, as open() already   
   > exists in windows   
      
   There is no such syscall. kernel32 exports CreateFile.   
      
   Regardless - Windows won't run the Linux ELF binary -   
   not even the one I produce myself - regardless. Although   
   if you install WSL it would, but that's installing   
   Linux - and of course Linux programs run under Linux.   
      
   It is PDOS/386 that will run it. And receive the   
   INT 80H. And check for the flag.   
      
   Because PDOS/386 is sort of a DOS/Windows clone,   
   all files are expected to use CRLF as line terminators.   
   That's the user requirements, basically.   
      
   So I'm trying to get my Linux ELF binaries (ones that   
   I build myself) to fit into that existing user   
   requirement.   
      
   > and those cygwin don't need to reimplement that, it   
   > only provides things that do not exists in windows but is part of POSIX.   
      
   It is Cygwin that invented O_TEXT, not Windows.   
   To satisfy that same user requirement above.   
      
   >> And not Linux source. Linux binaries.   
   >   
   > Cygwin is not:   
   >   
   > - a way to run native Linux apps on Windows. You must rebuild your   
   > application from source if you want it to run on Windows.   
      
   I know.   
      
   That's why I'm not using Cygwin, I'm using PDOS/386.   
      
   Which ALREADY runs a hello world Linux ELF binary.   
      
   (unlike Cygwin - which never did)   
      
   > If you want to make changes to POSIX API, you need to start contacting   
   > Austin Group, with time changes will appear in Linux.   
      
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Group   
      
   Ok, thanks.   
      
   > I doubt you would   
   > have more luck with the Austin Group than convincing Linus to add a   
   > patch to add something that Linux don't need.   
      
   Ok. I'll try the Austin Group first though. As you   
   noted, this isn't for Linux. It's for (quibbling   
   aside) a competitor of Linux, so the Austin Group   
   would be more appropriate.   
      
   BFN. Paul.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)