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: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:48:57 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Mozilla 1.3 built on cygwin? Message-ID: <20030328234857.GA971@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <002301c2f4b4$6e378c60$80cf06d5 AT BRAMSCHE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <002301c2f4b4$6e378c60$80cf06d5@BRAMSCHE> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:58:50PM +0100, Ralf Habacker wrote: >I can't prove a fact, that forking is the most anonying problem and there were >some initial work from some people (I remember Chris Faylor, Chris January and >other) to identify the problems and to implement a new copy-on-write semantic, >which will be much faster, You misremember. I did hobble together a copy-on-write implementation and found that it was actually slower. The generic win32 implementation of copy-on-write isn't powerful enough to completely implement fork anyway. 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/