And here are the numbers for record -lam: ben@sarun[1]: .../rtems/rtems-4.9.0 > darcs --version 2.3.1 (release) ben@sarun[1]: .../rtems/rtems-4.9.0 > time darcs record -lam'import release 4.9.0' Finished recording patch 'import release 4.9.0' darcs record -lam'import release 4.9.0' 143,33s user 6,57s system 69% cpu 3:34,22 total vs. ben@sarun[1]: .../rtems/rtems-4.9.0 > /home/ben/.cabal/bin/darcs --version 2.3.99.2 (release candidate 2) ben@sarun[1]: .../rtems/rtems-4.9.0 > time /home/ben/.cabal/bin/darcs record -lam'import release 4.9.0' withSignalsHandled: Interrupted! /home/ben/.cabal/bin/darcs record -lam'import release 4.9.0' 1549,45s user 11,81s system 94% cpu 27:40,50 total (killed by me) Re Petr Rockai: No this isn't critical for us at the moment, so I don't need a workaround. I still think regressions of such a scale should be considered a bug. Cheers Ben