Wed May 23 12:11:00 GMT 2001
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 04:51:25PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:35:25PM +0200, Jacek Trzcinski wrote:
>> I have created patch to serial device which implements ioctl function
>> manipulate RTS and DTR line and reading modem lines. I will send it when
>> I sign copyright
>> assignment form.
>> I didn't do two things in my patch about I would like discuss here.
>> First remarks I shared
>> with Corinna Vinschen and She suggested send e-mail here.
>> 1) To read input queue there should be use constant
>> FIONREAD (information taken from different sources) but cygwin occupy it
>> socket software !(it is macro). Constant TIOCINQ I have taken from linux
>> where it is equal FIONREAD(FIONREAD is not occupied in linux like in
>> cygwin). As Corinna remarked, this macro
>> expands to a constant expression but including asm/socket.h in serial
>> programming seems to make not much sense. She suggested (I support her)
>> to create asm/ioctls.h file like in Linux.
>However, to be least intrusive we could also include <asm/socket.h>
>in sys/termios.h to accomodate applications needs and to be able
>to define TIOCINQ as FIONREAD. That doesn't look nice, though.
>> 2) Next matter concerns device name convention. In cygwin one may use
>> /dev/com1 or /dev/ttyS1 and so on. (what for is utilizing /dev/comx
>> devices I do not
>> know - it is not portable to linux).
>> I think also that number of devices should start from 0 not from 1 thus
>> devices shold be
>> numbered /dev/ttyS0, /dev/ttyS1 and so on like in linux because again it
>> is not portable.
>> Somebody who had access to /dev/ttyS0 in linux will have not in cygwin !
>I'm not quite sure about this point. A linux programmer has to port
>his application anyway, but existing ported applications using
>/dev/ttyS1,S2,... would suddenly break. I don't think it's worth
I wonder how many applications are actually using this. I think I only added
it recently. I didn't stop to consider the implications of ttyS1 != ttyS0.
Maybe a survey of the cygwin mailing list is in order? I generally don't like
to break backwards compatibility but if there is no one using this functionality
then maybe it is no big deal.
More information about the Cygwin-patches