On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:32:46 -0400, Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@cygwin.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 06:52:38PM +0200, Vincent R. wrote: >>On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 12:06:22 -0400, Christopher Faylor >>> No one is asking for benchmarks! However, if we were, strace is >>> particularly unsuitable for that task. If you want to see improvements >>> happen then dive into the code and offer specific suggestions. >> >>I did but maybe it would be important to know for sure that the problem >>comes from fork and exec because I think you are sharing the same code >>with mingw and it runs a lot faster with it. So before I dive : >> >>1) I want to be sure that fork/exec are the reason >>2) See the differences with mingw. > > If you think we're sharing process creation code with MinGW then you > have a misunderstanding about the nature of the projects. One of the > main reasons for MinGW is that they want to do everything natively. > That is obviously not the case with Cygwin. > I know that.
> If you are talking about MSYS then, the last time I checked, we were > actually slightly faster. I will check this affirmation. > I obviously can't tell you what to do but I > doubt that comparing the current version of Cygwin against an ancient > hacked version of Cygwin (i.e., MSYS) is going to be very useful. > Ok so no more proposal. <autosuggestion mode> But after all why am I so interested in reducing compilation time on cygwin because now I have time to take 10 coffees, read all my emails, ... </autosuggestion mode> -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
