From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18546 invoked by alias); 23 May 2011 06:02:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 18531 invoked by uid 22791); 23 May 2011 06:02:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nm27-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (HELO nm27-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com) (98.138.91.187) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Mon, 23 May 2011 06:02:07 +0000 Received: from [98.138.90.56] by nm27.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2011 06:02:06 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.132] by tm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2011 06:02:06 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp219.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2011 06:02:06 -0000 Received: from cgf.cx (cgf@173.48.46.160 with login) by smtp219.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 May 2011 23:02:06 -0700 PDT X-Yahoo-SMTP: jenXL62swBAWhMTL3wnej93oaS0ClBQOAKs8jbEbx_o- Received: from localhost (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4515042804C for ; Mon, 23 May 2011 02:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 06:02:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: CYGWIN=tty round 2 Message-ID: <20110523060204.GA26130@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20110522211906.GA13428@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <1306119201.4572.4.camel@YAAKOV04> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1306119201.4572.4.camel@YAAKOV04> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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/msg00327.txt.bz2 On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 09:53:12PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: >On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 17:19 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>I don't think we saw anyone step forward with a valid reason why they >>needed to use CYGWIN=tty over something like "mintty". >> >>I've summarized the thread where Corinna asked why people used >>CYGWIN=tty over CYGWIN=notty below. >> >>I don't see any showstoppers here so unless people can provide specific >>examples of how this change would cause hardwhip, we'll be removing >>CYGWIN=tty in a snapshot near you soon. > >I could add XWin: > >http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9763 > >And once again, using mintty is a solution. > >Since mintty is the solution to so many of these scenarios, shouldn't >we make it the default terminal (IOW add mintty to Base and replace the >Cygwin.bat shortcut with mintty's)? The status quo just encourages >people to use a deficient terminal without any idea that a better one >exists. I may be missing something but I don't see how the above is not a bug. The symptom was mentioned in the previous thread. Unless xwin.exe goes out of its way to reattach to its calling console (by doing something similar to what setup.exe does) there is no stdout/stderr to write to. Windows resets the stdin/stdout/stderr of Windows GUI apps which are run from a console. cgf -- 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