X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:33:21 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] [1.7] Updated [security]: bash-3.2.49-23
Message-ID: <20090702183321.GJ9839@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <announce DOT 4A4C18B6 DOT 4000505 AT byu DOT net>  <55392 DOT 99 DOT 237 DOT 216 DOT 211 DOT 1246503158 DOT squirrel AT www DOT sidefx DOT com>  <4A4C238B DOT 8070804 AT byu DOT net>  <20090702031625 DOT GA23085 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <4A4CAD63 DOT 50101 AT sidefx DOT com>  <20090702174647 DOT GE9839 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <4A4CF813 DOT 4090300 AT sidefx DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A4CF813.4090300@sidefx.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:10:27PM -0400, Edward Lam wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 08:51:47AM -0400, Edward Lam wrote:
>>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>And for those who want to wail about this, take a look at the various
>>>>"Why is Cygwin so slow????" threads that have been here in the last
>>>>month.  Every special case accommodation we make to allow MS-DOSisms to
>>>>work seamlessly adds code to Cygwin and cause corresponding slowness
>>>>for everything.
>>>
>>>That's an interesting view.  So are you saying that this is why MINGW
>>>is faster?
>>
>>No, they just aren't as mean as we are.  We like to make things
>>purposely slow because then people suffer.
>
>I asked what I thought was a sensible question for someone who doesn't
>know the internal workings of cygwin/mingw.  It wasn't meant as a flame
>bait.  I was just interested in what trade-offs mingw might be making
>for its speed.

I guess I forgot the reference:

http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#WJM

The answer to your question is easily discernible just by reading the
respective web pages to the two projects.  The important word to find on
the Cygwin web page is "emulation".  On the MinGW web page, the word to
scan for would be "native" (or maybe "minimal").

This has been discussed multiple times in this very mailing list, even
as recently as a couple of days ago.

If you want more of a clue, look at the number of linux packages that
Cygwin offers versus the number that MinGW provides.  Do you see a
disparity?  Why do you think that is?  Hmm.  Maybe the MinGW project
is mean too.

cgf

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