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
Reply-To: Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.0.20031229141944.03bb7768@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: 
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:33:39 -0500
To: seebs AT plethora DOT net (Peter Seebach), Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
From: Larry Hall <cygwin-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Question about ash and getopts
In-Reply-To: <200312291920.hBTJKsqd013484@guild.plethora.net>
References: <Your message of "Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:13:56 EST." <6 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20031229140746 DOT 02c43c40 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1> <200312291920 DOT hBTJKsqd013484 AT guild DOT plethora DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 02:20 PM 12/29/2003, Peter Seebach you wrote:
>In message <6 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20031229140746 DOT 02c43c40 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1>, Larry Hall writes:
>>If you're curious, I suggest you run some timings on ash with and without 
>>getopts enabled using a few configure scripts from some of Cygwin's 
>>packages, large and small.  It was the slowness of configure scripts 
>>that prompted the streamlining of Cygwin's ash.  If you can provide 
>>data that suggests that there isn't a performance penalty for these
>>scripts with getopts on, then a patch to turn it back on may be considered.
>
>Did anyone perform an actual test showing that the getopts code was making
>a difference, or was it just a general desire to trim everything in sight?


I don't know.  It was a long time ago that this change was made.  I don't
recall the details (even if they were posted at the time).  In any case, 
since ash has been /bin/sh for many, many years now and things have clearly
changed all over Cygwin in this time, the tests run then may have different
results than those run now.  That's why I suggested you run your own tests
and report back the results if you're interested in more details.  Beyond 
that, I can only point to the (very old) email archives and say "whatever
details exist are in there somewhere".  But if it wasn't clear to you what
the reason was for making the change (although it sounds like you were), 
it should be clear now. ;-)



--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746                     


--
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/