Introducing slight binary incompatibility in newer executables?

[Earnie Boyd]

--- Chris Faylor <cgf@cygnus.com> wrote:
-8<-
> 
> I don't think this binary incompatibility is so great that we need to bump
> the middle number.  If we do that then we should probably think about other
> changes as well and maybe even creating a cygwin2.dll.
>

IMHO, it is, any cygwin-app that is updated now, will have to have the updated
cygwin1.dll.  What other changes are you thinking of?  
 
>
> Anyway, my initial thought that my changes would speed things up may have
> been too optimistic.  The DLL that I've created is 30K larger than the
> previous version and I'm not sure why.  I'm investigating now.
> 

You also said that it would decrease the size of the executable, is this
accomplished.  If so, then it could still be worth it.

BTW, try adding a -D__OPTIMIZE_SIZE__ to the newlib/libc/string/Makefile to see
if you notice and increase in speed.

Regards,

=====
---
   Earnie Boyd: < mailto:earnie_boyd@yahoo.com >
            __Cygwin: POSIX on Windows__
Cygwin Newbies: < http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/gw32/index.html >
           __Minimalist GNU for Windows__
  Mingw32 List: < http://www.egroups.com/group/mingw32/ >
    Mingw Home: < http://www.mingw.org/ >

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/