Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
X-Apparently-From: <earnie?boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Message-ID: <3AF2CCDE.B648C930@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 11:38:06 -0400
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To: Cygwin Users <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Dorgan <tdorgan AT yahoo DOT com>
CC: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: amazingly long ls times
References: <20010504145650 DOT 1551 DOT qmail AT web3306 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tom Dorgan wrote:
> 
> hello,
> 
> been using cygwin for around 2 years. been keeping up with the updates.
> running on win2k. "lately" have noticed ls seems sluggish. check this
> out:
> $ time ls -aF
> <86 filenames deleted>
> real    0m9.224s
> user    0m0.060s
> sys     0m0.090s
> $
> 
> this seems typical. my disk has been scrubbed with de-fragmenter. was
> using ~123/256mb at time of command. doesnt seem right.
> 

The developers are currently aware of the slowness and are working at
getting responsiveness improved.  I've just submitted a patch to Newlib
which will help with your reported long ls time once the patch is
approved.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple