Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
X-Apparently-From: <earnie?boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Message-ID: <3AF6E177.42A39A64@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:55:03 -0400
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To: Cygwin Developers <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: 1.3.1 *is* slower
References: <20010427160641 DOT A11039 AT redhat DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> It is true that 1.3.1 is slower than 1.1.8.  I benchmarked it on my NT 2K
> dual processor 300MHZ system.
> 
> A config.status --recheck in my gdb build directory takes a minute 1 second
> with 1.3.1, 52 seconds with 1.1.8, and 48 seconds with 1.1.5.
> 
> Not a very encouraging trend.
> 
> Anybody have any ideas?  This is usually a sign of an extra disk open somewhere
> but I don't see anything obvious.
> 

Hey Chris, what do your timings give you now?  Just curious if my
strrchr patch improved it.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com