delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
DomainKey-Signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
:list-help:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to | |
:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=hFsQ+ | |
acJDxwpQNoUk2AheMDhIDam+3f5DV8wsxBZ177QFry8ptXC3yU9BKpKMlSqJXNVQ | |
JbMdDveIXmQMaIR8yiNDdt4cGWCb2NjgCMGo2EEjDo4KwmOjXSF5yj1wj3K7D8ZW | |
ZU8lvVPNs1fPQQbecVOKECiVtltfi6F5b1kxNE= | |
DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
:list-help:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to | |
:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=IAQXBogKU2g | |
XT3GQpIJZHI2Gx4c=; b=XHsA+P2hpuL0U2Vrfcl1lj7a/3kKkUqBGDRlzgYqiZ3 | |
76ndGETZ6vP79xxs8p3DvKVRQzFGsw0DBaPgjjS0adlKpJQ4Q3sTYTbFhTdeD7IF | |
eAS0DAEiGu6LPiFKNiegS96zGl0OXalv1cb/ohU8YOju6Y8K/4dSQtv5OrERI2XE | |
= | |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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 |
Authentication-Results: | sourceware.org; auth=none |
X-Virus-Found: | No |
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: | No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 |
X-HELO: | mail.missioncriticalit.com |
From: | Fabrice Niessen <fni-news AT pirilampo DOT org> |
To: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org> |
Cc: | 18752 AT debbugs DOT gnu DOT org, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, dmoncayo AT gmail DOT com |
Subject: | Re: bug#18752: 24.3.94; Why is Cygwin Emacs 2x quicker than Windows Emacs? |
References: | <86h9z2rb42 DOT fsf AT example DOT com> <83siim1z6h DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <86iojimmjg DOT fsf AT example DOT com> <83wq7ydjc7 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> |
X-Url: | http://www.MyGooglest.com/fni |
X-Archive: | encrypt |
Date: | Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:51:12 +0200 |
In-Reply-To: | <83wq7ydjc7.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:42:48 +0300") |
Message-ID: | <86zjctlvkv.fsf@example.com> |
User-Agent: | Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.94 (windows-nt) |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Fabrice Niessen wrote: >> >>> You also forgot to tell what compiler options were used for each >>> build. E.g., if the Cygwin build is optimized, whereas the MinGW >>> build is not, the twofold speedup is expected (I generally see >>> a factor of 2.5 between an optimized and unoptimized build). >> >> I have no idea how Cygwin Emacs gets compiled, nor Windows Emacs >> (done by Dani). Putting them in Cc. > > As Ken points out, the variable system-configuration-options is the > way to tell. On my Windows Emacs: "--enable-checking 'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=-DGLYPH_DEBUG=1" > Given that the Cygwin build is optimized, it suffices to show that the > MinGW one isn't, to explain the difference in speed. Dani, can you build an optimized version as well next time? Thanks! -- 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
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |