Re: Building LibreOffice on Windows

> I think that is oversimplifying things quite a bit.

Well, what isn't? Excuse me for writing quick emails without spending
a week researching first.

> While there are some
> stability issues with cygwin

"some" stability issues?

> when combined with evil Windows necessities like
> in-memory-virusscanners, the slowness is primarily a result of the abysmal
> windows filesystem performance.

And the slowness of Cygwin's  forking and executing the various Perl,
shell and whatnot processes involved in each file being compiled (note
the pipe to filter-showIncludes.pl) has nothing to do with it?

> And the compiling stuff is not really the hard
> part when we talk about a windows baseline -- it is stuff like the l10n
> tooling, awk, Perl, etc.. If you believe those problems to magically go away
> when using the native implementations instead of the cygwin ones, you are very
> naive and you would make setting up the build environment even more complex.

I hope you aren't talking to me here; of course I am very aware of
these issues, and would not recommend even bothering trying. After
all, letting them work on "improving the build system" has been a good
way to have contributors lose interest in the past... (but for some
reason the gbuild attempt was successful, yay!)

> The reason why simple compiles on Windows are so slow has nothing to do with
> the tooling around it -- it is because we are not using that obnoxious
> 'precompiled headers' cheat that makes C++ compilation times on Windows
> almost bearable.

And this is not oversimplifying?

Talking about stuff that doesn't work, and nobody is interested in
working on to make work, is fairly Irrelevant, isn't it?

--tml