[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Stepan Kasal
Subject: Re: _AS_DETECT_BETTER_SHELL speedup
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:16:00 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Hello Paul,

OK, I back off my one line patch.  But:

On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 09:51:57PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:
> > And on windows, for example, every fork not done is good!
> Minor efficiencies like this are not sufficient justification,

indeed, the speedup is not minor for Windows ports.
For example, on Cygwin, each fork can take ages.

> if there is a real risk of breaking things elsewhere.

I don't think there is a risk of actually _breaking_ the configure

Nothing worse can happen than a few spurious 'not found' messages.

> > I do not understand this reasoning.  AFAIK Bourne shells fork with
> > redirected { }, newer shells don't.

So I propose the following:
Ralf volunteered to produce a complete patch; let him do it.
Let's apply the patch; if a problem with unexpected 'not found' messages
appears, let's revert that patch.

I think the risk of cosmetic problems is worth the speedup on platforms
like Cygwin.

Paul, please give your nod, and Ralf will produce a patch.

Have a nice day,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]