-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Jack Andrews on 10/9/2008 11:25 PM: > in the example, i guess all that is done is to fork and exec ls, > grabbing its stdout. this can be done with CreateProcess() easily > without having to emulate everything that fork does. so my real > question is, has anyone tried optimizing fork/exec to CreateProcess()?
No, changing bash to use CreateProcess is not the answer. The real question is whether someone with copyright assignment is willing to write posix_spawn[p], and write it more efficiently than forking, at which point, bash should be patched to take advantage of it, at least when exec'ing subprocesses (it won't help the other common case where bash truly must fork, such as in creating subshells, but might speed up the execution of child processes). > and would the maintainers of (eg. bash) accept a patch for use with > cygwin? (so i wouldn't have to continually forward port my fork/exec > code). You are welcome to post whatever patch you'd like. But in the case of bash, if the patch uses native Windows calls, I'm very unlikely to either apply it or to pass it upstream, as it would just be a maintenance nightmare, not to mention too risky of breaking posix semantics by going behind cygwin's back. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] volunteer cygwin bash maintainer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkjvSLIACgkQ84KuGfSFAYBYLwCfQgLOwpuMvvxODEhTBQmDlbiW wK0AoIqgLSaFj4vF6QM1ieKA/73Xlt8N =ipVN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
