[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/2/06, Philippe Conraux wrote:
I have to build a large project on Windows.
Build libraries using Intel compilers needs 12 hours on cygwin
when same build needs 1 hour on Linux (same computer : dual boot, same
compilers ifc 9.1)
Do you need a feature that is speci
On 12/03/2006, Eliah Kagan wrote:
If not, could you use the make that comes with MinGW
(http://www.mingw.org/)? If a POSIX-like environment is required,
would MSYS do the trick as well (http://www.mingw.org/msys.shtml)?
Since MSYS is an early fork of Cygwin, if the performance problem
the OP is
On 12/2/06, Philippe Conraux wrote:
I have to build a large project on Windows.
Build libraries using Intel compilers needs 12 hours on cygwin
when same build needs 1 hour on Linux (same computer : dual boot, same
compilers ifc 9.1)
Do you need a feature that is specific to cygwin's make or th
I deeply apologize -- I'm used to a different mail list which does
automatically screen the addresses.
Subject: Re: cygwin + make 10 time slower than equivalent linux make (same
ifc compiler)
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:25:27
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU - reformatted
According to Mark Moriarty on 12/2/2006 9:20 AM:
> From: Christopher Faylor
^
http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR
>
> Ther
One can always dream :)
From: Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: cygwin + make 10 time slower than equivalent linux make (same
ifc compiler)
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:18:37 -0500
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 04:06:49PM +
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 04:06:49PM +, Mark Moriarty wrote:
>Line 47 of WHAT? I have the cygwin source, but no file reference was
>given.
Sorry. This was a joke. If speeding up Cygwin was as simple as
removing a line, don't you think that it would have been done already?
>From: Christopher
Line 47 of WHAT? I have the cygwin source, but no file reference was given.
Thanks.
From: Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: cygwin + make 10 time slower than equivalent linux make (same
ifc compiler)
Date: Sat, 2 De
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:06:57PM +0100, Eric Lilja wrote:
>Philippe Conraux skrev:
>>I have to build a large project on Windows.
>>
>>Build libraries using Intel compilers needs 12 hours on cygwin
>>when same build needs 1 hour on Linux (same computer : dual boot, same
>>compilers ifc 9.1)
>>
>>
Philippe Conraux skrev:
I have to build a large project on Windows.
Build libraries using Intel compilers needs 12 hours on cygwin
when same build needs 1 hour on Linux (same computer : dual boot, same
compilers ifc 9.1)
Equivalent build using Visual-Studio seems faster (not yet real measures
I have to build a large project on Windows.
Build libraries using Intel compilers needs 12 hours on cygwin
when same build needs 1 hour on Linux (same computer : dual boot, same
compilers ifc 9.1)
Equivalent build using Visual-Studio seems faster (not yet real
measures)
Is it a known issue
11 matches
Mail list logo
