Subject: Re: cygwin.bat
From: Sam Edge <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 03:11:30 +0100

cjf wrote in <[email-masked]>
in gmane.os.cygwin on Sat, 10 May 2003 20:22:34 -0400:

> >> >Could be my imagination, but even seems a
> >> > little slower.
> >> That *would* be your imagination.

> >Maybe not.
> >If you start up bash.exe directly by double-clicking it or by putting
> >bash.exe in a shortcut, then only one process is created.
> >
> >If you use cygwin.bat, then under Windows NT/2k/XP you first have a
> >CMD.EXE process created and then a bash.exe. The CMD.EXE sits around
> >doing nothing until the bash.exe process exits.
> > [snip]

> Translation: Except for a neglible startup cost, it's probably his
> imagination.

Negligible on a modern PC. Noticeable on some of the kit I've got
here. ;-)

-- 
Sam Edge
(who seldom parts with a working computer)

--
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/