Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <20020902173619.32212.qmail@web21007.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 10:36:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Nicholas Wourms Subject: Re: A Simple Real World Benchmark for Cygwin To: John Vincent , rickr AT mn DOT rr DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --- John Vincent wrote: > Hi, > > I'm running a 450Mhz laptop with 256Mb RAM. > The O/S is Win 2K SP3. > Your configure script takes approx 25 seconds, when > run as a bash command in an rxvt window with default > mounts as per setup (install binary/all) > Ok, I think we've established a long time ago that the method Win9X/ME uses to do file I/O is much slower than the method NT uses. How do I know this? Well it seems that the slowest parts occur when using "sed" to find and replace data or copying lines of data. This is especially prominent in the creation of libtool. So the real question is: what, if anything can be done about it? Since no one seems to know for sure, let's drop it and stop dwelling on unpleasant circumstances. Cheers, Nicholas __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- 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/