From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17742 invoked by alias); 10 May 2011 22:12:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 17733 invoked by uid 22791); 10 May 2011 22:12:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nihxway4out.hub.nih.gov (HELO nihxway4out.hub.nih.gov) (128.231.90.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 22:12:04 +0000 X-IronPortListener: Outbound_SMTP X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvEAAM63yU2cKEcU/2dsb2JhbACXW44xd6tzm1SGDwSUMoo5 Received: from unknown (HELO NIHHT01.nih.gov) ([156.40.71.20]) by nihxway4out.hub.nih.gov with ESMTP; 10 May 2011 18:11:36 -0400 Received: from NIHMLBX02.nih.gov ([156.40.71.32]) by NIHHT01.nih.gov ([156.40.71.20]) with mapi; Tue, 10 May 2011 18:11:36 -0400 From: "Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]" To: "cygwin@cygwin.com" Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 22:12:00 -0000 Subject: RE: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why? Message-ID: <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A209E8030CCE@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov> References: <20110509161028.GJ27739@calimero.vinschen.de> <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A209E8030CB9@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov> <20110510171846.GA27537@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20110510171846.GA27537@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor sent the following at Tuesday, May 10, 2011 1:19 PM >If we changed the /dev/console to /dev/consN (where N is a unique number >for each console window) would that address your use case? Yes, it works for me if there would be a reasonably small (preferably single digit) number in the output of tty or ps. >You would not be able to do something like echo foo >/dev/cons4 and have >foo be echoed another console window though. Since I haven't been on a real Unix/POSIX machine since the late '80s, I'd forgotten about that. Now you made me want to DO it! :-) >Eliminating the special case of tty handling >would simplify the cygwin pty layer, shrink the size of the DLL, and >generally make Cygwin a little easier to maintain. Even if you don't accommodate me, that's OK, if your lives will be easier. As I wrote, if I find that I really miss tty identification, I can learn to use mintty. (Or maybe I should just switch - but not today.) Thank to you all for your work on cygwin. - Barry Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple