Are you going to check this in, Egor? It looks like it might help
with some tty code that I'm debugging currently.
cgf
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 09:00:02PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:53:10PM +0300, Egor Duda wrote:
>>CF> Won't this cause problems when communicating with non-cygwin
>>CF> applications?
>>
>>as far as i can understand from source, if slave have pipe's handle to
>>get input from master, it can assume that master is cygwin process.
>>that means that opening input_mutex from slave's side is safe, this
>>mutex (end event) should already exist. if cygwin master opens pipe
>>and communicate though it with non-cygwin child, it will freely
>>acquire and release input mutex, since noone else hold it.
>>
>>the only possible problem is that master can have two children, one
>>cygwin and one non-cygwin, and they both are trying to read. in this
>>case it's possible that cygwin child will see input_available_event,
>>but won't see any data in pipe, since non-cygwin child had already
>>eaten it. but i think it was the same in old code, too.
>>
>>i've tested it in either tty or notty mode and with non-cygwin
>>programs in local console and via ssh.
>
>So, a non-cygwin program running under ssh, via a pty, will work correctly?
>In that case, check her in, with much thanks.
>
>One minor nit, however. Please adhere to the coding standards of the
>code your changing. You seem to have added at least one or two
>cases of:
>
> foo ( bar );
>
>rather than
>
> foo (bar);
>
>It's also:
>
> if (!foo)
>
>not
> if (! foo)
>
>(I don't know if you've done this, but I do find it, from time to time,
>in cygwin code.)
>
>Thanks again. It sounds like this could speed up pty/tty handling in
>cygwin.
>
>Will this even get rid of the cvs/ssh hang problem on Windows 95?
>
>cgf
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.
http://sources.redhat.com/ http://www.redhat.com/
