From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" To: hcobb@telegenisys.com, cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Time taken for ls -la --color=yes Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 10:38:00 -0000 Message-id: <3.0.5.32.19990308133351.009bb950@pop.ma.ultranet.com> In-reply-to: <199903081826.NAA16303@acestes-fe0.ultra.net> References: <36E40422.157007C1@atos-group.com> <199903081638.LAA11084@y11a165.neo.rr.com> <36E40422.157007C1@atos-group.com> <199903081826.NAA16303@acestes-fe0.ultra.net> X-SW-Source: 1999-03/msg00245.html At 01:26 PM 3/8/99 -0500, Henry J. Cobb wrote: >Doesn't LS take a lot of time to count the entries in every subdirectory it >encounters (even when it never lists them) just in order to fill out the >stat structures it then throws away? > > Perhaps you can tell us, since you seem to imply that you know something about the way ls works. If it does work exactly as you suggest, then I would say there is cause to be concerned about ls, although that comment is based solely on yours and my incomplete understanding as to why ls would do this. Of course, if ls is doing this, it is outside the realm of the cygwin DLL, since it only provides services to ls. In this case, a patch may need to be made to ls and, quite possibly, for cygwin only. However, without more information, its hard to pursue the idea that either ls or cygwin could be patched to make ls faster... Larry Hall lhall@rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (781) 239-1053 8 Grove Street (781) 239-1655 Wellesley, MA, 02482-7797 http://www.rfk.com -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" To: hcobb@telegenisys.com, cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Time taken for ls -la --color=yes Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 19:45:00 -0000 Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19990308133351.009bb950@pop.ma.ultranet.com> References: <36E40422.157007C1@atos-group.com> <199903081638.LAA11084@y11a165.neo.rr.com> <199903081826.NAA16303@acestes-fe0.ultra.net> X-SW-Source: 1999-03n/msg00245.html Message-ID: <19990331194500.RsfbyyxsWdfeRBMXyhtFuomZJuhM5ezTnnG4O8JmQWk@z> At 01:26 PM 3/8/99 -0500, Henry J. Cobb wrote: >Doesn't LS take a lot of time to count the entries in every subdirectory it >encounters (even when it never lists them) just in order to fill out the >stat structures it then throws away? > > Perhaps you can tell us, since you seem to imply that you know something about the way ls works. If it does work exactly as you suggest, then I would say there is cause to be concerned about ls, although that comment is based solely on yours and my incomplete understanding as to why ls would do this. Of course, if ls is doing this, it is outside the realm of the cygwin DLL, since it only provides services to ls. In this case, a patch may need to be made to ls and, quite possibly, for cygwin only. However, without more information, its hard to pursue the idea that either ls or cygwin could be patched to make ls faster... Larry Hall lhall@rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (781) 239-1053 8 Grove Street (781) 239-1655 Wellesley, MA, 02482-7797 http://www.rfk.com -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com