* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) [not found] <200202230005.g1N05kv04208@cate1-67.reshall.ou.edu> @ 2002-02-23 8:28 ` Eli Zaretskii 2002-02-24 9:33 ` Ehud Karni 2002-02-27 3:48 ` Jon Cast 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-23 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel > From: Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> > Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 18:05:45 -0600 > > What sort of ``trade-offs'' do you mean? In addition to the ones you raised, here are some more off the top of my head: * Are there good ports of X toolkits, such as Lesstiff? Windows users generally expect to get file selection boxes and other similar dialog widgets, so if the toolkit you use does not include that, they will probably be unhappy. * Do the ported toolkits support Windows fonts and/or Windows-specific encodings (a.k.a. codepages)? If not, we will need to think how to let users work with Windows locales. * The shell issue: should the Cygwin port support only Bash, or the stock Windows shells as well? * There's also this talk among users of the Cygwin port of XEmacs about it being very slow, especially in Dired. I don't understand why would the Cygwin build be slow to the point that it annoys users, but perhaps we should try to do something about it. For example, if the reason is that the pipe implementation is slow, maybe we should use the ls-lisp.el package in the Cygwin port instead of the external `ls' program. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-23 8:28 ` Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-24 9:33 ` Ehud Karni 2002-02-24 11:07 ` Eli Zaretskii 2002-02-27 3:48 ` Jon Cast 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ehud Karni @ 2002-02-24 9:33 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jcast, emacs-devel On Sat, 23 Feb 2002 10:28:51 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> wrote: > > * There's also this talk among users of the Cygwin port of XEmacs > about it being very slow, especially in Dired. I don't understand > why would the Cygwin build be slow to the point that it annoys > users, but perhaps we should try to do something about it. For > example, if the reason is that the pipe implementation is slow, > maybe we should use the ls-lisp.el package in the Cygwin port > instead of the external `ls' program. I use the Cygwin `ls' with NTEmacs. It is SLOWER because beside looking in the directory it also READS each file to check for its magic number, to decide if the file is executable or symbolic link. I don't think piping is the problem. The spawning is slow (I estimate it to be 1/3 to 1/2 a second) but it is a constant overhead. The piping itself is fast (I use it in Cygwin's Bash scripts all the time). Ehud. -- Ehud Karni Tel: +972-3-7966-561 /"\ Mivtach - Simon Fax: +972-3-7966-667 \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign Insurance agencies (USA) voice mail and X Against HTML Mail http://www.mvs.co.il FAX: 1-815-5509341 / \ mailto:ehud@unix.simonwiesel.co.il Better Safe Than Sorry _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-24 9:33 ` Ehud Karni @ 2002-02-24 11:07 ` Eli Zaretskii 2002-02-24 12:05 ` Jason Rumney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-24 11:07 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: jcast, emacs-devel On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Ehud Karni wrote: > I use the Cygwin `ls' with NTEmacs. It is SLOWER because beside looking > in the directory it also READS each file to check for its magic number, > to decide if the file is executable or symbolic link. The DJGPP port of GNU `ls' also reads the files, for the same reasons, but someone (perhaps even you) told me that it is much faster. There's an optimization trick in the DJGPP port that causes it to only read files whose extension doesn't tell unequivocally whether it is an executable file or not, but I'd expect the Cygwin version to do the same, since one of the Cygwin developers, DJ Delorie, knows very well what DJGPP does. (Actually, everything described above is inside `stat', not in `ls'; `ls' just calls `stat'.) _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-24 11:07 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-24 12:05 ` Jason Rumney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jason Rumney @ 2002-02-24 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Ehud Karni, jcast, emacs-devel Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> writes: > The DJGPP port of GNU `ls' also reads the files, for the same reasons, > but someone (perhaps even you) told me that it is much faster. In my experience, all the Cygwin tools are much slower than native ports. They have improved since a few years ago though, when Cygwin diff took about 2 minutes on a 250k file, while a native port took about 10 seconds. -- Jason Rumney _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-23 8:28 ` Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) Eli Zaretskii 2002-02-24 9:33 ` Ehud Karni @ 2002-02-27 3:48 ` Jon Cast 2002-02-27 16:02 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jon Cast @ 2002-02-27 3:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> wrote: > In addition to the ones you raised, here are some more off the top > of my head: > * Are there good ports of X toolkits, such as Lesstiff? Windows > users generally expect to get file selection boxes and other similar > dialog widgets, so if the toolkit you use does not include that, > they will probably be unhappy. LessTif is supposed to work under Cygwin-Xfree; no idea if it qualifies as a ``good'' port---I'll look into that. > * Do the ported toolkits support Windows fonts and/or > Windows-specific encodings (a.k.a. codepages)? If not, we will need > to think how to let users work with Windows locales. Dunno. > * The shell issue: should the Cygwin port support only Bash, or the > stock Windows shells as well? What are the issues with supporting Windows shells? PTY problems? > * There's also this talk among users of the Cygwin port of XEmacs > about it being very slow, especially in Dired. I don't understand > why would the Cygwin build be slow to the point that it annoys > users, but perhaps we should try to do something about it. For > example, if the reason is that the pipe implementation is slow, > maybe we should use the ls-lisp.el package in the Cygwin port > instead of the external `ls' program. <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/2002-February/006128.html> and <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/2002-February/006131.html> seem to explain most of the speed difference. Given these two factors, I doubt ls-lisp.el would be much faster for a Cygwin port of Emacs than ls would be. The only way to be sure, though, is to do the port and profile it, of course. I don't think it's a concern for now, though. Jon Cast _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-27 3:48 ` Jon Cast @ 2002-02-27 16:02 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-27 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel > From: Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:48:10 -0600 > > > * Do the ported toolkits support Windows fonts and/or > > Windows-specific encodings (a.k.a. codepages)? If not, we will need > > to think how to let users work with Windows locales. > > Dunno. I'd suggest to find out. Which toolkit to support is a major design constraint, so you'll probably want to make that decision up front. If the odds suggest to use Lesstiff, then the absence of support for Windows character sets would be a major PITA for the users. This is one area where XEmacs cannot help us, I think: its Windows port is not yet m17n-capable. > > * The shell issue: should the Cygwin port support only Bash, or the > > stock Windows shells as well? > > What are the issues with supporting Windows shells? PTY problems? What I had in mind was the support for running subprocesses. Stock Windows shells have peculiarities and misfeatures, such as different quoting rules, the nasty habit of returning zero exit status even if the command they ran failed, etc., and some of the shells are 16-bit programs which cannot be safely ran as async subprocesses. The Windows-specific code in Emacs (the w32*.c files) deals with these problems by redefining some library functions, and the issue I had in mind was whether to keep all that code or toss it. If you keep it, there might be complications due to redefinition of library functions. > > * There's also this talk among users of the Cygwin port of XEmacs > > about it being very slow, especially in Dired. I don't understand > > why would the Cygwin build be slow to the point that it annoys > > users, but perhaps we should try to do something about it. For > > example, if the reason is that the pipe implementation is slow, > > maybe we should use the ls-lisp.el package in the Cygwin port > > instead of the external `ls' program. > > <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/2002-February/006128.html> > and > <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/2002-February/006131.html> > seem to explain most of the speed difference. I don't think they really explain that. I replied to the first one with another data point that seems to contradict the assumption that `stat' is the explanation. As to the second one, Jason just reaffirmed what I heard many times elsewhere: that Cygwin applications are slower, but didn't give any explanations. Perhaps we should ask on the Cygwin list, where the Cygwin developers could give us authoritative answers. > Given these two factors, I doubt ls-lisp.el would be much faster for > a Cygwin port of Emacs than ls would be. If the problem is `stat', I agree. > I don't think it's a concern for now, though. Right; for now, it's just something to keep in mind. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Using GDB in NTEMACS
@ 2002-02-22 19:30 Jon Cast
2002-02-22 19:55 ` Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jon Cast @ 2002-02-22 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> wrote:
> If Emacs could be compiled with Cygwin, that would indeed solve many
> problems, at least for people who mostly use Cygwin programs.
> Unfortunately, a Cygwin build of Emacs is not around the corner;
> volunteers are welcome to work on that.
A quick interjection: I /am/ willing to work on a Cygwin build of
Emacs, if that would be accepted here.
Jon Cast
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) 2002-02-22 19:30 Using GDB in NTEMACS Jon Cast @ 2002-02-22 19:55 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-02-22 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel > From: Jon Cast <jcast@ou.edu> > Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:30:17 -0600 > > A quick interjection: I /am/ willing to work on a Cygwin build of > Emacs, if that would be accepted here. Sure, please go ahead. I think a possibility to build Emacs as a Cygwin application would be a terrific feature. In case you didn't know, Emacs can be compiled with Cygwin today, but as a MinGW application, not a Cygwin application. See nt/INSTALL for the gory details. Also, from past discussions of this issue, it could be useful first to discuss the best approach to this project. There are trade-offs that IMO need to be considered when you decide how much Windows-specific code to keep in the Cygwin build, whether to use the ported Xlib or the native Windows GUI, etc. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-02-27 16:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <200202230005.g1N05kv04208@cate1-67.reshall.ou.edu>
2002-02-23 8:28 ` Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) Eli Zaretskii
2002-02-24 9:33 ` Ehud Karni
2002-02-24 11:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-02-24 12:05 ` Jason Rumney
2002-02-27 3:48 ` Jon Cast
2002-02-27 16:02 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-02-22 19:30 Using GDB in NTEMACS Jon Cast
2002-02-22 19:55 ` Cygwin build (was: Using GDB in NTEMACS) Eli Zaretskii
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).