From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: MinGW port usable Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:45:46 +0100 Organization: eudaptics software gmbh Message-ID: <45BF05BA.4B356B37@eudaptics.com> References: <200701292320.43888.johannes.sixt@telecom.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 30 09:44:55 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 1HBobm-0008IA-6e for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:44:54 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752648AbXA3Iov (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 03:44:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752649AbXA3Iov (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 03:44:51 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:41894 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752648AbXA3Iou (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 03:44:50 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HBobN-0002sc-N3 for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:44:29 +0100 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:44:29 +0100 Received: from J.Sixt by cm56-163-160.liwest.at with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 09:44:29 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cm56-163-160.liwest.at X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds wrote: > Can you elaborate about any performance differences, especially with > cygwin? Does this make git perform reasonably on Windows, or are the > performance problems as bad as with cygwin? Performance is horrid, although better than I initially expected. I don't (want to) have cygwin installed to compare it (that's why I did the MinGW port in the first place ;) Maybe others can comment on this? The test suite takes ~15min to complete on my box, which is an oooold 800MHz with a slow HD. (And it's still Win2K, if that matters.) Quite frankly, the "performance boost" that I expect from this port is that it allows me the workflow that I want, instead of constantly banging my head against the walls of CVS/SVN/you-name-it. > gitk really shouldn't use either. It should probably use > > git-show-ref -h -d > > instead, which has the same output format (modulo a space vs tab issue), > and is entirely local, with no silly unnecessary remote connext. Thanks, this works (I tested Junio's version). The problem with ls-remote was that it is a shell script, and for some reason it dumps its output into a cmd.exe that opens and closes right away instead of to the pipe. -- Hannes