Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <01ff01c115c4$90544660$6d07a8c0@miro> From: "Michael Scheibler" To: References: <034601c11505$0a368710$6d07a8c0 AT miro> <20010725104153 DOT B6484 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: is cygwin lame??? Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:17:32 +0200 Organization: OneVision Software AG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 4:41 PM > On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 02:26:32PM +0200, Michael Scheibler wrote: > >We are experiencing a major difference in performance between bash on a real > >unix system and on cygwin. I can't imagine that this is a problem of > >Windows - it might be a catastrophe in os design, but you can't say that > >it's THAT slow. > >Now we looked at out network monitoring tools and found this: > > > >. > >. > >. > >. > >31384 13:04:10 bash.exe:112 FASTIO_READ Z:\make_classdll.sh SUCCESS Offset: > >598 Length: 1 > >31385 13:04:10 bash.exe:112 FASTIO_CHECK_IF_POSSIBLE Z:\make_classdll.sh > >SUCCESS Read: Offset: 599 Length: 1 > >31386 13:04:10 bash.exe:112 FASTIO_READ Z:\make_classdll.sh SUCCESS Offset: > >599 Length: 1 > >31387 13:04:10 bash.exe:112 FASTIO_CHECK_IF_POSSIBLE Z:\make_classdll.sh > >SUCCESS Read: Offset: 600 Length: 1 > >31388 13:04:10 bash.exe:112 FASTIO_READ Z:\make_classdll.sh SUCCESS Offset: > >600 Length: 1 > > Thanks for the bug report. You've properly hit on the problem. > > Cygwin is indeed lame or as we like to call it "ambulatorally challenged". > > Sorry for the inconvenience. > Please don't apologize! We are just trying to find out, why our build process is so slow. I have to say THANK YOU for cygwin. I think you are doing a great job. And as I mentioned to John already, my english could be much better - I didn't want to be insulting with my subject. It should be just a normal question. And again, thank you for the quick answer. Does this mean, that we really found a problem in cygwin? Is it possible to fix it? > cgf > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/