Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin-developers=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID:	<19990728013158.24033.rocketmail@web126.yahoomail.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 Jul 1999 18:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com
Subject:	Re: vfork implementation
To:	cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com> wrote:
> In benchmarks, this vfork is *at least* twice as fast as a normal fork.
> 

This is worth including it in the next release.

> So what do you think?  Is this good enough to go into the mythical next
> net release (B21)?  Should I make it a cygwin option, i.e.
> CYGWIN=fastvfork?

Not worth doing, the code I've seen that contains vfork always checks to see if
it's available.  If you don't want it just undefine the HAVE_VFORK or what ever
macro.

===
Earnie Boyd <mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>

Newbies, please visit
<http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/gw32/index.html>

(If you respond to the list, then please don't cc me)
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

- Raw text -