X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:00:54 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cygwin copy problems usb 2.0 Message-ID: <20060727220054.GC6653@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> 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> <20060727211107.GB4348@calimero.vinschen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060727211107.GB4348@calimero.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:11:07PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >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. A few weeks ago there was a guy in libc-alpha mailing list complaining that glibc's API wasn't as rich and powerful as what is found on Windows. As far as I know he's still alive. 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/