From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32059 invoked by alias); 9 May 2011 16:21:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 32051 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2011 16:21:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nougat.ucs.ed.ac.uk (HELO nougat.ucs.ed.ac.uk) (129.215.13.205) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 16:21:09 +0000 Received: from nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.33.33]) by nougat.ucs.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id p49GL3hG016369 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 17:21:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.24.15]) by nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p49GL3dl010947 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 17:21:03 +0100 Received: from calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p49GL3k2018256 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 17:21:03 +0100 Received: (from ht@localhost) by calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id p49GL2wt018252; Mon, 9 May 2011 17:21:02 +0100 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why? References: <20110509161028.GJ27739@calimero.vinschen.de> From: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 16:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20110509161028.GJ27739@calimero.vinschen.de> (Corinna Vinschen's message of "Mon, 9 May 2011 18:10:28 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Edinburgh-Scanned: at nougat.ucs.ed.ac.uk with MIMEDefang 2.60, Sophie, Sophos Anti-Virus, Clam AntiVirus 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/msg00090.txt.bz2 Corinna Vinschen writes: > Chris and I are wondering how many people are using the Windows console > as local console window in CYGWIN=tty mode and why. I am one such. > Here's why we ask: > > We are both not sure why anybody would use it voluntarily, given that > it's I/O is extremly slow, compared to using a Windows console window in > the default CYGWIN=notty mode or, even better, mintty. Actually, we > only keep the console tty mode up because it was "always there", 14 > years or so. Um, history is sticky, is I guess the answer. When I started using cygwin (a _long_ time ago), CYGWIN=tty was the recommended setting (and isn't it still there in cygwin/cygwin.bat ?). So I have faithfully copied that into my Windows environment initialisation ever since. Is it time to remove it? I do use a windows console occasionally for pure Windows activities---what change(s) will I see? ht -- Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam] -- 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