From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: MinGW port usable Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:35 -0500 Message-ID: <20070130162835.GD25950@spearce.org> References: <200701292320.43888.johannes.sixt@telecom.at> <20070130151803.GA25779@spearce.org> <20070130155653.GB25950@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linus Torvalds , Johannes Sixt , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 30 17:29:07 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HBvql-0005th-1N for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:28:51 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752092AbXA3Q2r (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752487AbXA3Q2r (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:47 -0500 Received: from corvette.plexpod.net ([64.38.20.226]:32795 "EHLO corvette.plexpod.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752092AbXA3Q2q (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:46 -0500 Received: from cpe-74-70-48-173.nycap.res.rr.com ([74.70.48.173] helo=asimov.home.spearce.org) by corvette.plexpod.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HBvqR-00078R-Iz; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:31 -0500 Received: by asimov.home.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2A6D520FBAE; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:28:35 -0500 (EST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - corvette.plexpod.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - spearce.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > I wonder what the difference is between NO_MMAP=Yes and NO_MMAP= > > on Windows. > Cygwin: > real 0m0.812s > and > real 0m2.094s > > IOW, the numbers are slightly worse (!) than with mmap(). Slightly? That's double the time! > MinGW does not even have mmap(). But Windows has something almost there. I just read a flame war thread about implementing mmap in libiberty for MinGW by stealing source from Cygwin, and how the FSF might feel about someone's dirty feet after playing rugby. Yea... Google is good. :) -- Shawn.