cygwin on 95 slower than NT
Paul Sokolovsky
paul-ml@is.lg.ua
Tue Nov 30 04:17:00 GMT 1999
Hello Chris,
Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com> wrote:
>>>>It's known issue of Cygwin (and other POSIX layers, e.g. UWIN). They
>>>>all by some reason (probably because they themselves were developed on
>>>>NT, without enough attention to other Win32 systems) count Win9x as
>>>>'degraded mode'.
>>
[]
>>failed achieving objectives of my thesis! For some unknown reason
>>stupid thing didn't want to work badly - it did screen output quite
>>fast, process files fast also and didn't corrupt them trying to cut
>>\r\n to \n or vice-versa. But don't hold breath, story has happy end:
>>I was granted my Master degree.
CF> If you have this superior tool available to you, one would have to
CF> wonder why you aren't using it.
Because it's not yet as complete as cygwin. But I'm slowly
working on it.
CF> Again, feel free to provide a patch.
At the spring, here was the discussion why cygwin doesn't get as
much contributions as it really worth. I remember some guy told that
he disagreed with design principles and that - pitifully - made him
start own scratch instead of more deserving way of helping improving
what already was.
CF> cgf
Best regards,
Paul mailto:paul-ml@is.lg.ua
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com
More information about the Cygwin
mailing list