Re: From Microsoft: Windows 10 Console and Cygwin

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1513 bytes --]

On Jun  2 14:49, Warren Young wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2015, at 1:20 PM, Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 06/02/2015 10:37 AM, Rich Eizenhoefer wrote:
> >> Can you provide more detail on changing isatty function to support Cygwin PTY's? I need to be able to support the request in our backlog.
> > 
> > As long as we are wishing, it would be awesome if Windows natively
> > supported ptys as actual objects, instead of making cygwin have to
> > emulate them on top of other objects.
> 
> In my ignorance of how ptys map to Windows console objects, I held off from asking for this when Mr. Eizenhoefer solicited ideas, but this is what I thought of at that time, too.
> 
> In other words, this notion of “virtual terminals” is already implemented multiple times, following a standard that specifies the expected semantics — POSIX — so why not just do that?
> 
> Why, in the end, can Windows *not* have ptys?

That's a good question. 

Basically Windows console handles are kind of one half of the equation.
They don't follow the expected semantics but they are what native
Windows tools know and expect.

Opening up the other half of the equation, the server side, without
forcing to start conhost, might be enough to allow emulating POSIX ptys.

But I agree, real ptys with POSIX semantics would be cool.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]