Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
X-Apparently-From:	<earnie?boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Message-ID:	<3AF2CCDE.B648C930@yahoo.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 May 2001 11:38:06 -0400
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	Cygwin Users <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Tom Dorgan <tdorgan AT yahoo DOT com>
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: amazingly long ls times
References:	<20010504145650 DOT 1551 DOT qmail AT web3306 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>

Tom Dorgan wrote:
> 
> hello,
> 
> been using cygwin for around 2 years. been keeping up with the updates.
> running on win2k. "lately" have noticed ls seems sluggish. check this
> out:
> $ time ls -aF
> <86 filenames deleted>
> real    0m9.224s
> user    0m0.060s
> sys     0m0.090s
> $
> 
> this seems typical. my disk has been scrubbed with de-fragmenter. was
> using ~123/256mb at time of command. doesnt seem right.
> 

The developers are currently aware of the slowness and are working at
getting responsiveness improved.  I've just submitted a patch to Newlib
which will help with your reported long ls time once the patch is
approved.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -