Serious performance problems (malloc related?)

Thu Jun 2 15:43:00 GMT 2005

> amusingling enough -- their
> execution times are *slower* than cygwin's...  Of

this is a joke right? I found SFU to be at least 2-3
times faster in loading and executing programs in
general. Its too bad their POSIX imple. is less than
half baked and unuseable for building any package

> course MS might have 
> deliberately used non-optimized methods for their
> services to convince
> people to recode for the Win32 interface (and thus
> benefit by increased
> Win32 lockin).

this might be famously true.


Discover Yahoo! 
Find restaurants, movies, travel and more fun for the weekend. Check it out! 

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list