Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
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: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:28:54 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-rcm AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin performance
Message-ID: <20031021192854.GG380@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3F957E0D DOT 2060405 AT tlinx DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3F957E0D.2060405@tlinx.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 11:42:21AM -0700, Linda W. wrote:
>Has anyone done any testing on performance of cygwin utils over their
>native win counterparts?

Cygwin is slower.  Cygwin is known to be slower.  And, if you give it
a few minutes of thought it is obvious why Cygwin has to be slower.

I assume that anyone who doesn't understand why cygwin programs have to
be slower than normal windows programs also complains bitterly about the
loss of power in their VW Bug since they started pulling a trailer
around everywhere they go.  What's up with that?  That's the real
puzzler.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/