Re: CYGWIN=tty round 2

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>]

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