X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RFC_ABUSE_POST,TW_CG,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: From: Karl M To: Subject: RE: NT4? Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 14:32:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20110331205810.GA17218@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> References: <20110331203416.GB2606@calimero.vinschen.de> ,<20110331205810.GA17218@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: 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 > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:58:10 -0400 > From: cgf > Subject: Re: NT4? > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 01:47:43PM -0700, Karl M wrote: > > > >At some point, would there be any (significant) performance advantage to > >moving (some of the) platform differences to compile time? (Not for all = of > >the applications, just for the Cygwin DLL and perhaps cygserver? > > You mean something like: > > gcc -DALLOW_NT4 something-random-program.c > > There would be no benefit whatsoever to allowing something like that since > there would still have to be accommodations in cygwin to handle it the > antique platform. > No, not that at all. I was asking about platform specific Cygwin DLL builds. =20 Thanks, =20 ...Karl=20=09=09=20=09=20=20=20=09=09=20=20 -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple