X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 23:11:07 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: cygwin copy problems usb 2.0
Message-ID: <20060727211107.GB4348@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <5519828.post@talk.nabble.com> <5528112.post@talk.nabble.com> <44C91F4A.8050404@cygwin.com> <20060727201931.GD3409@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <5528898.post@talk.nabble.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5528898.post@talk.nabble.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie.com@cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com

On Jul 27 13:48, aldana wrote:
> 
> isn't there a possibitly that cygwin provides a quicker cp-implementation?
> i mean 4 minutes for a copy of 70MB to a memstick (instead of CopyFile() 20
> sec.) is not really good performance.  
> i guess there is a reason for that... 

Right, how did you know?  The reason is that cp is a portable
implementation using simple reads and writes to perform the copy.
There's no such thing as a CopyFile routine on POSIX systems.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
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/