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

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 - 23:07:24 MST