X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TW_CG,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100530170747.GA8605@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> References: <20100530170747 DOT GA8605 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 17:03:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Cygwin Performance and stat() From: NightStrike To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 08:54:10AM -0700, Christopher Wingert wrote: >>I was looking into speeding up stat() performance. =A0More specifically >>bash, ls, test, stat performance. =A0I've seen the subject come up before. >>Git recently implemented a native Win32 work around. =A0Are there any cyg= win >>patches around? > > If there was a way to make stat() faster why wouldn't it be in the source > code already? > > cgf There's always room for ingenuity and improvements, isn't there? -- 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