X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <44C91F4A.8050404@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:17:14 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20060112 Fedora/1.5-1.fc4.remi Thunderbird/1.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cygwin copy problems usb 2.0 References: <5519828.post@talk.nabble.com> <5528112.post@talk.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <5528112.post@talk.nabble.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 aldana wrote: > when running a little program using CopyFile() under cygwin it is about as > quick as totalcommander. so it must be the abstraction layer of cygwin which > makes copying veeeery slow... Not necessarily. To draw that conclusion, you would want to compare the implementation of 'cp' compiled natively ('gcc -mno-cygwin' for example) with Cygwin's and your little program. Only if the natively compiled version performed much closer to your program using CopyFile() could you conclude that Cygwin is to blame. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- 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/