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 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 01:05:09 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Mozilla 1.3 built on cygwin? Message-ID: <20030327060509.GF17191@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References:

<5 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 9 DOT 2 DOT 20030326213452 DOT 02e70cc0 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030326213452.02e70cc0@pop3.cris.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:59:19PM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote: >> 2. Having a complex GUI app like Mozilla ported to Cygwin could >> prove to be a stick in which to measure and compare the over >> all efficiency and performance of Cygwin. If the "native" >> Mozilla and the Cygwin version performed reasonably the same, >> then we would know that Cygwin is on track. If the Cygwin >> version lagged, it would set concrete goals for the >> Cygwin/XFree team. > >That's not going to happen any time soon. XFree86/Cygwin has no >graphics acceleration. Apart from that, little if anything runs as fast >through Cygwin as it does on the Win32 API even if GUI operation is >ignored or irrelevant. > >I don't mean this as a criticism, but just a fact. I imagine the >biggest win would be by getting some graphics acceleration in XFree86. Yeah, this was my first thought when I saw this thread. $app = mozilla; print "Why is $app so *slow* on cygwin!"; 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/