From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Faylor To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com Cc: bdlow@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Re: i/o STOP + CONT (bash?) problem Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 22:37:00 -0000 Message-id: <20000906013632.C7181@cygnus.com> References: <968167382.14182.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <39B5B1FB.14BDFF0D@nortelnetworks.com> <20000905220710.A6604@cygnus.com> <39B5DB5F.C05A7C09@nortelnetworks.com> <20000906013444.B7181@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00192.html On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 01:34:44AM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote: >On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:51:27PM +1000, Benjamin Low wrote: >>Thanks for the prompt reply. >> >>Chris Faylor wrote: >>... >>> Um. CTRL-S has nothing to do with the STOP signal. >> >>As I understand (understood :-) it, the terminal driver issues various >>signals to the current process in response to predetermined input >>sequences (set via stty). Thus with the "standard" stty config, ctrl-C >>sends an SIGINT, ctrl-S sends SIGSTOP, etc. This gels with my practical >>experience in that kill -STOP|-CONT works the same as >>ctrl-S|ctrl-Q (on every unix I've worked on (linux, solaris, >>cywgin-sometimes). > >Sorry, you are understanding wrong. CTRL-S (aka XOFF) does not send >SIGSTOP. > >At a gross level, I guess you could say that sending a SIGSTOP to >a signal stops a process similarly to the way that typing CTRL-S >stops output but the two are really very different. > >You can verify this on linux by doing a 'ps' on a test process. It will >be in the 'T' state if you've do a 'kill -STOP' to the process. It >will also be in a 'T' state if you type CTRL-Z. > >It will be in some other state ('S', probably) when you've stopped the >output with CTRL-S. > >For fun, once you've done this, try doing a 'kill -CONT' on the >process where you just typed CTRL-Q. You won't see any change. CTRL-S cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com