Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/08/02/21:54:49
> >I'm really seeing the non-optimized cygwin cp behaviour causing bad
> >reputation, which could be easily patched and maybe even accepted
> >upstream. Who knows. Eric what do think? Would it be worthful to think
> >about?
I don't really want to maintain a Windows API patch, and doubt that
it would be accepted upstream. Now if there were something more
POSIX-y that we could do to speed things up, such as posix_fadvise,
which cygwin could translate into whatever Windows API hooks that
would improve the situation, then that would be the way to go.
>
> If this is what you want then you should look into a non-cygwin
> solution. There are a couple of projects which provide GNU tools for
> Windows without resorting to something like the Cygwin DLL.
Agreed. My other big worry is that I have no control over whether
using straight Windows API will violate other POSIX assumptions, thus
making cp (and mv) noncompliant. I am not a fan of mixing cygwin and
non-cygwin APIs when it can be helped.
That said, if someone else comes up with a potential patch, I will
certainly review it. But it is not my highest priority right now.
--
Eric Blake
--
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/
- Raw text -