AIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: ls.exe slow down in cygwin 1.3.13 (a followup from the "ls problem"
thread last november 2002)
> Carlo Florendo wrote:
>
> > I've tried stracing the output of "ls -l" and
Carlo Florendo wrote:
> I've tried stracing the output of "ls -l" and I've attached the output of strace too.
> An observation on the output of strace is that the delay starts when line 442 is
> printed.
>
> Line 442 of the strace output is:
>
> 104 1970355 [main] ls 2012 _open: -1 = open (/usr
Sorry again. I forgot to put my answer to this question in the previous message.
> Reply to David Starks-Browning:
>
> >Do you have any anti-virus software running?
nope i don't have. neither am I running a personal firewall or something.
Thanks!
Best Regards,
Carlo
--
Carlo Florend
ls is not really a
problem but I'd be glad if I could let it behave as it used to.
I've posted the this observation last year in the list (under the thread "ls -problem"
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-11/msg00921.html) and I thank everyone for their
replies. Sorry if I j
en't upgraded cygwin since
November 2002 last year since I'm content with my installation now. The current
variation in the behaviour of ls is not really a
problem but I'd be glad if I could let it behave as it used to.
I've posted the this observation last year in the l
Al,
Without a `cygcheck -s -v -r` output attached (as per
http://cygwin.com/bugs.html ), the only things that can be offered are
wild guesses, so here's one: it looks like you might have a misguided
alias. In bash, type
$ type -a ls
and see if there's anything unusual about it. Also, try redir
Al Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i recently reinstalled cygwin.
> now i find that the ls command
> does not work in some directories.
Sounds like it might be due to the fact that ntsec is now on by default.
Check your Windows permissions on the directories concerned, and read about
ntsec in
i recently reinstalled cygwin.
now i find that the ls command
does not work in some directories.
when i give the commands
cd /usr/local/c
ls
here is what gets printed on the screen:
drwxr-xr-x: not found
-rw-r--r--: not found
drwxr-xr-x: not found
drwxr-xr-x: not found
drwx
David,
The odd thing is that the delay occurred on a file (in a directory) that,
according to Carlo, do not exist. Nor do they exist on my system even
though I have all of the Cygwin packages installed (including XFree86/Cygwin).
Why would a simple attempt to access a non-existent file trigger
Carlo,
Do you have any anti-virus software running? 'ls -l' has to open each
file, and this typically triggers your AV software to scan it.
Depending on your AV product, and how you have configured it, this
might explain unusual delays.
If you do have AV software running, try repeating the tests
> >> There is a huge delay accessing
> >> F:\cygwin\usr\local\etc\zoneinfo\posixrules,
> >> on your F: drive.
> >> What's that?
I have no idea. In fact, /usr/local/etc/zoneinfo does not exist--neither a
directory nor a file.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
B
rre A. Humblet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: ls problem
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:18:59PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > The delay is apparently ls doing things that haven't been straced. I
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:18:59PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> The delay is apparently ls doing things that haven't been straced. I don't
> know what could be causing the delay. It would be interesting to see what
> the task manager says is happening during this time. Does ls spike the
>
He put it of F Drive.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Pierre A. Humblet
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 10:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ls problem
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:56:49PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> On
Pierre,
I think this probably explains the F: drive:
**
Program name: F:\cygwin\bin\ls.exe (1728)
App version: 1001.8, api: 0.34
DLL version: 1003.13, api: 0.62
DLL build:2002-10-13 23:15
OS version: Windows NT-5.0
Date/Time:2002-11-20 10:53
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:09:33PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:56:49PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:48:10AM -0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
>> > I don't know how to interpret the output of strace so I just included it
>> > here as ls-out
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:56:49PM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:48:10AM -0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
> > I don't know how to interpret the output of strace so I just included it
> > here as ls-output.bz2. I hope this helps us see the problem.
>
> There is a huge de
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:48:10AM -0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
> I don't know how to interpret the output of strace so I just included it
> here as ls-output.bz2. I hope this helps us see the problem.
There is a huge delay accessing
F:\cygwin\usr\local\etc\zoneinfo\posixrules,
on your F: drive.
9, 2002 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: ls problem
> Carlo,
>
> I think your next step must be to run "ls" under "strace" and see where
the
> excess time (presumably idle time) is going.
>
> Randall Schulz
> Mountain View, CA USA
>
>
> At 17:00 2002-11-19, Ca
- Original Message -
From: "Igor Pechtchanski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Carlo Florendo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: ls problem
>
> Try running 'ls -l' first to pull
Carlo,
The difference between 'ls' and 'ls -l' is that 'ls -l' actually performs
a stat() call on every file in the directory, whereas 'ls' simply reads
the directory contents and doesn't touch the files. Therefore, the files
themselves (or, rather, the stat records for them) need to be in disk
c
Carlo,
I think your next step must be to run "ls" under "strace" and see where the
excess time (presumably idle time) is going.
Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA
At 17:00 2002-11-19, Carlo Florendo wrote:
Hi Igor,
I tried disabling ntsec and "ls -l" is still slow. I'm using
1.3.15-cygwin
Hi Igor,
I tried disabling ntsec and "ls -l" is still slow. I'm using
1.3.15-cygwin-1-3-15-1. "ls -l" and "ls -ln" takes almost the same amount
of time.On a directory with 3 short text files, the difference, when I
timed "ls -l" and "ls -b", is still considerable.
fcarlo@ZEUS~
$ time ls -b
Thanks for the info. I've read the FAQ and it mentioned something about the
// notation on the PATH environment variable. I checked my PATH variable
and there was no presence of the // notation. I then set the PATH to
include only the usual bin directories but "ls -l" is still considerably
slow.
On Monday 18 Nov 02, Carlo Florendo writes:
> Hello,
>
> I've been using cygwin for 3 years now and last week, I downloaded the
> latest cygwin from one of the mirrors and everything in well except for one
> problem. I noticed that whenever I type 'ls -', the output gets delayed for
> a few secon
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Carlo Florendo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been using cygwin for 3 years now and last week, I downloaded the
> latest cygwin from one of the mirrors and everything in well except for one
> problem. I noticed that whenever I type 'ls -', the output gets delayed for
> a few second
Hello,
I've been using cygwin for 3 years now and last week, I downloaded the
latest cygwin from one of the mirrors and everything in well except for one
problem. I noticed that whenever I type 'ls -', the output gets delayed for
a few seconds. This never happened to me using the old cygwin. I
27 matches
Mail list logo
