X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,BOTNET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-id: <4C05BBEF.7070705@cygwin.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:03:27 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Cygwin Performance and stat() References: <20100530170747 DOT GA8605 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4C03D6C5 DOT 4050004 AT x-ray DOT at> <80373222dd5d43b134a5ede7036e7674 DOT squirrel AT www DOT webmail DOT wingert DOT org> <4C058753 DOT 1030400 AT cygwin DOT com> In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 6/1/2010 8:06 PM, Christopher Wingert wrote: > That's fine, can you propose something that is acceptable? Actually no, I'm no visionary here. It's not clear to me how to transparently determine what fields provided by stat() are used by a particular application. I suppose that it's possible to create some static analysis that could, in theory, determine this, which perhaps meshes with Eliot's idea to leverage autoconf. But that's just idle rumination on my part. And, of course, that's a compile rather than a runtime thing (not that anyone was advocating one over the other necessarily). > BTW, who does this patch need to pass muster with? The only maintainer I > could find is Dave Korn. Any patch would be to the Cygwin internals so it would need to go to the cygwin-patches list. The main reviewers would be Corinna and Chris. But I expect others may also chime in on something this fundamental. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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