Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:55:17 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: YA snapshot available [Re: new snapshot with some tty/WinMe fixes] Message-ID: <20040117055517.GA11240@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20040103181903.GA9424@redhat.com> <3.0.5.32.20040103181628.00835c70@incoming.verizon.net> <20040116183044.GA24127@redhat.com> <40084421.23DC049E@ieee.org> <20040116215259.GA26308@redhat.com> <20040117022135.GA48682835@hpn5170x> <20040117034901.GA7899@redhat.com> <20040117044757.GA49384663@hpn5170x> <20040117051629.GB16533@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040117051629.GB16533@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 12:16:29AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >As always, in the absence of any debugging detail, I can only fix what I >can duplicate myself. After sending my rant, I thought about the fact that you might be routinely using CYGWIN=tty. I tried running a make with that and managed to get some strange behavior. So, I can duplicate this. It was, of course, my old friend vfork. I am seriously considering just ripping out vfork support. I have to do a benchmark to see if there is actually any speed savings for this since I'm adding so many kludges and workarounds to support it that I'm wondering if it is actually slower than normal fork. cgf -- 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/