Serious performance problems (malloc related?)
Thu Jun 2 21:32:00 GMT 2005
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> > > Is there any reason why the cygwin DLL couldn't be built
> > > twice: once for Win9x, and once for WinNT-based systems?
> > >
> > > Aside from potential installation issues ("install this
> > > version of the DLL under 9x, that version under NT), it
> > > seems like this would be a reasonable optimization.
> > As long as we're mulling over ideas...
> Alternatively, we could drop Win98 support.
Dropping it altogether would be unfortunate. Providing Win98 support DLLs
in a separate package is a possibility. There's still the point that CGF
raised, about there being many more people with the knowledge of Win32 API
than those with the knowledge of Nt* API.
|\ _,,,---,,_ firstname.lastname@example.org
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ email@example.com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin