X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4A9FE555.6020109@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:48:37 +0100
From: Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Simple bash script is slow to execute - appears to be time spent      starting commands like ls
References: <E1MjDsO-0004DK-9a AT elasmtp-masked DOT atl DOT sa DOT earthlink DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <E1MjDsO-0004DK-9a@elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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

David Tazartes wrote:

> So given that, I wonder if our intrepid Cygwin maintainers could be
> convinced to write a kind of compiled bridge that allows for any command in
> /bin to also be run in-process with bash.exe using static linking. I can
> imagine all kinds of weird things one would have to worry about, like piping
> data between processes, forks, etc, but it would conceivably make Cygwin
> 100x faster on Windows. (Perhaps *any* /bin command is too stringent a
> requirement - but the 100 most common ones would be a good start.) I'll
> freely admit that I don't have the time, knowledge or inclination to
> contribute such a thing, but does anyone else have any interest in doing so?

  It sounds like you're thinking of some kind of combination version of bash
with busybox built in?

  I don't think it's ever going to be possible to run one process inside
another, they'd stomp all over each others file descriptors and stuff, but
bash-with-busybox-builtin would be able to do a lot of work by
forking-without-execing, which might be a neat optimisation.

    cheers,
      DaveK


--
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