Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<20020902173619.32212.qmail@web21007.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:	Mon, 2 Sep 2002 10:36:19 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Nicholas Wourms <nwourms AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject:	Re: A Simple Real World Benchmark for Cygwin
To:	John Vincent <jpv50 AT hotmail DOT com>, rickr AT mn DOT rr DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<F80qa1425pXCX58r5Hv00001f62@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- John Vincent <jpv50 AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm running a 450Mhz laptop with 256Mb RAM.
> The O/S is Win 2K SP3.
> Your configure script takes approx 25 seconds, when
> run as a bash command in an rxvt window with default
> mounts as per setup (install binary/all)
> 

Ok,

I think we've established a long time ago that the method Win9X/ME
uses to do file I/O is much slower than the method NT uses.  How do I
know this?  Well it seems that the slowest parts occur when using
"sed" to find and replace data or copying lines of data.  This is
especially prominent in the creation of libtool.  So the real
question is: what, if anything can be done about it?  Since no one
seems to know for sure, let's drop it and stop dwelling on unpleasant
circumstances.

Cheers,
Nicholas

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -