On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:19:05PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote: >2009/6/23 Jon TURNEY: >> Always assuming that /bin/bash exists, or that /bin/sh is bash is probably >> bad style for portability across unicies. >> >> However, in this specific case, it's probably ok. > >You never know. If posix_spawn() ever gets implemented in Cygwin to >avoid the slowness of fork(), /bin/sh might well change to the first >shell that supports it.
It's really somewhat of an urban myth about Cygwin's fork being slow. Cygwin's exec is also pretty slow. I'm not really sure that posix_spawn would cause any kind of performance improvement. /bin/sh used to have a local hack which used "vfork" instead of "fork" back when I thought I could implement vfork in a lightweight fashion. However, /bin/sh wasn't really noticeably faster using that mechanism. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
