X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: From: "Sisyphus" To: "Edward Lam" , References: <7c6dcbb9c797277cc8ffb1fc985844af AT mail DOT smartmobili DOT com> <3353982C81F6441590DD8E4B4C2D0841 AT desktop2> <50535 DOT 99 DOT 237 DOT 216 DOT 211 DOT 1245125771 DOT squirrel AT www DOT sidefx DOT com> In-Reply-To: <50535.99.237.216.211.1245125771.squirrel@www.sidefx.com> Subject: Re: Optimize cygwin on recent windows version (Vista and Seven) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:44:25 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Lam" >> >> Times taken were: >> Linux : 1.5 mimutes >> XP (mingw): 6.5 minutes >> Vista (mingw): 16.5 minutes >> Vista (cygwin): 23.25 minutes >> > > Are these tests on 64-bit or 32-bit Windows? All on 32-bit, except for Vista which is 64-bit. It hadn't really occurred to me that the 64-bit architecture might be playing a major role in the difference - I thought it must surely be the different OS's that accounted for the bulk of the slowdown ... interesting :-) Cheers, Rob -- 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/