This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Who's using "CYGWIN=tty" and why?
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:27:08AM +0200, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>Am 09.05.2011 18:10, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
>>Chris and I are wondering how many people are using the Windows console
>>as local console window in CYGWIN=tty mode and why.
>>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.
>>So, if you're using a console in tty mode, why are doing that? Did you
>>ever notice that it's much slower? Did you ever consider to switch to
>>mintty or any other terminal emulator instead? If not, why? Would
>>anybody really *miss* the CYGWIN=tty mode? If so, why? What does this
>>mode have which isn't covered by notty mode or another terminal
>I don't use it but there is one difference that I actually reported
>years ago: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=513 and I
>mentioned it again in
>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-patches/2009-q4/msg00155.html - later I
>tried to debug again and saw that with CYGWIN=tty, one fhandler_console
>object drives console I/O whereas with CYGWIN=notty 3 objects are
>created (for stdin, stdout, stderr). This is the reason for the cursor
>position response code getting lost because it is pushed into the wrong
>fhandler_console object. I tried to patch it but it got all messed up
>so I didn't post anything then.
We will certainly be willing to fix problems as they occur. I don't
think that erroneous cursor reporting is a show stopper.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple